We have now reached week 9 of a societal aberration that was supposed to last for 2. The lobster pot is starting to simmer, while we accept completely illogical, and capricious prohibitions, that would’ve been unthinkable 4 months ago.

Some retailers are allowed to be open, while other similar businesses are forced to remain closed because of an arbitrary process of waivers, granted by the state. The practice of religion is suppressed as ruthlessly as it might be in communist China. You can still obtain an abortion, but cannot schedule a procedure to alleviate the severe pain in your arthritic knee.  

Despite the improvement in your statistics, if you live in the wrong city or county, there is no end in sight.  Businesses both large and small are running out of money and calling it quits. And because of this, jobs are disappearing.

And in most cases where these restrictions are imposed, they are edicts of the executive, who dismiss any action, even at this late date, from the state representative bodies. In Pennsylvania this means that a lame-duck governor, and his ethically dubious health secretary, are acting without any voter accountability. They have rejected any input from the legislature (formerly called laws). They are overseeing the destruction of the state economy, perhaps with an eye towards the upcoming presidential election.

Let’s talk about masks. There is no consistent data on the use of masks. There are a lot of statistics bandied about, but little hard science, particularly in the face of the vast variety of face ware people are using.

Some justifications I have read include the idea that since countries like Taiwan and South Korea, have widespread usage, and they have done relatively well during this outbreak, then masks must be useful. Not really hard data from my point of view.

According to the CDC, on one hand, if a sick and a well person both have masks on, the transmission of virus will be very low. One study from the University of Hong Kong, studied this in hamsters.

Before you indulge yourself with the unbearably cute image of hamsters with teeny -tiny masks, it turns out that the study involved covering the hamster cages with mask-like fabrics. It did show that transmission of coronavirus was the lowest with both infected and uninfected hamster cages covered,

This is interesting I suppose, but it is not really directly comparable to our situation.

I wear a surgical-type mask in places where it is requested, mainly as a courtesy to others. The right mask can protect those that you encounter. Unless you’re wearing an N95 mask or better, it is unlikely to protect you. Many of the facial adornments I see in public are probably useless.

I can’t find any data to suggest wearing a mask in the out-of-doors protects anybody if people keep a reasonable separation.

I suspect we are all much too cavalier about these masks anyway for them to be useful. According to the WHO, we need to avoid touching them (yea right), and each time we do, we need to wash our hands once again. I’m sure we’re all doing that. They also worry that wearing a mask may cause some people to ignore social distancing. By observation, this seems to be true.

 I finally received the fancy masks I had ordered so many weeks ago through Amazon. This was a 5 pack of black masks said to be washable. It turns that these are made of a rubberlike plastic, with the mask itself composed of a foam-type material. Now the foam seems fairly dense, but I suspect not enough to filter micron-level droplets.

Unfortunately, the manufacturer included a button-like one-way exhalation valve on the right side of the mask. This conveniently allows me to share my potentially viral-laden droplets with others. I have relegated these masks for workshop duty, but I still see people wearing them.

I guess the message here, is that I hope we don’t get too hung up on facial coverings, as I suspect they are of limited value.

We continue to be told that this virus is likely to be persistent in the environment. In fact it is this theory that is being used to prolong our isolation.

It can be argued that the fact of viral persistence should lead to the opposite conclusion. If we are stuck with this coronavirus, we will not be able to avoid it forever by staying at home and keeping businesses and schools closed. The long-term cultural and psychological effects of this would be devastating.

Oh yea, and it will destroy the economy.

We are going to have to protect our most vulnerable, but the rest of us will need to swallow hard and understand that as the denominator increases with increased testing, that the mortality rate in most locales for relatively healthy people younger than 65, is quite low. The overall case fatality rate in Luzerne County for instance is about half a percent. At one point, two-thirds of those came out of nursing facilities.

I don’t want anyone else to die. But the state, national, and global economy has to survive if we’re to avoid a civilization level disaster.

I say this with the knowledge that in the event of a second wave, given my profession, I may be drawn into the middle of it.

We have endured a difficult spring, caused by both the pandemic and some persistently cold, crappy weather that made things even less pleasant. This weekend however is Memorial Day, our traditional beginning of summer. In the Northeastern US it is predicted to finally be warm and dry. I suspect people may find that the joys of the season may beguile them from their isolation.

I will likely be one of them.

Come see my new mask.

Despite the atmosphere’s reluctance, spring is insistent on emerging here in Northeastern Pennsylvania. As I write this, the trees in the valley are leafing out. Up higher the forest canopy has erupted in fluffy light green as the stubborn oak trees cautiously bloom.

We were teased with several warm days over the weekend. Unfortunately, predictions for the week are cool to cold, and unbelievably there is snow predicted for Friday. It seems somewhat cruel of nature to provide us with an unusually cold spring, in the same year it has gifted us with this wonderful Chinese coronavirus.

Time in lockdown rolls on. At the VA Hospital in Wilkes-Barre, we see sporadic cases, most of whom are modestly sick. Around our state, infections and deaths continue to rise, but far more slowly than before.  Overall from the standpoint of coronavirus, Pennsylvania appears to have stabilized.

Regarding drug treatments, Gilead’s antiviral drug remdesivir, underwent a phase 3 trial, that was featured rather prominently in the news as supporting the drug’s effectiveness. As I read the trial, it seemed to be more about establishing whether a 5 versus a 10-day course of the drug was appropriate for treatment. Efficacy did not seem to be an endpoint in this study. The drug was used to treat hospitalized, hypoxic but not ventilated COVID-19 patients. The mortality rate of these patients in both arms of the studies (5 versus 10 days) was 7%.

By comparison, a study in JAMA looking at hospitalized patients with COVID 19 in New York City had a mortality rate of 21%. These studies are completely unmatched however in terms of age or disease severity, and again the Gilead study did not include ventilated patients (at the start). The New York study had a mean age of 63 years old, with patients apparently as old as 107. This clearly might hint that remdesivir is helpful in these patients.

 Interestingly, 553 people died in the New York study, but only 373 were admitted to an ICU, and roughly 330 were placed on ventilators. This means that at least 223 of the dead, did not receive ICU care or mechanical ventilation in a premorbid state.

Given the age range reported, I suspect a percentage of these people were not aggressively treated due to age, or multiple comorbid conditions. This suggests that there were many patients, even without the pandemic, with the potential to die in the next several months. This would tend to lower the practical mortality rate of this illness.

Let’s talk about masks. First rule: No mask short of an N95-type will protect you for instance from an aerosol containing viral particles. However, there is some conflicting data to suggest that an infected person, projects less infectious material by using facemasks. The problem has been that supplies of medical type masks, which are more effective are inadequate, forcing people into homemade alternatives.

So, when I’m in the grocery store, I see all manner of masks from 3M particulate masks, to surgical type masks, to homemade cloth masks and even bandannas pulled up over the nose. If you’re an asymptomatic carrier, the homemade cloth masks and particularly the cowboy chic, probably does little to contain your little viral hitchhikers from visiting other folks. Surgical masks when available, test better in this regard.

Then there those people who wear them while solo running or driving in their cars alone. I fear it’s becoming another form of virtual signaling. According to CDC’s newest guidelines when you’re asymptomatic, masks should be worn only when conditions preclude social distancing. They are in no way a replacement for adequate separation and are probably unnecessary when that is achieved. All this, of course, changes if you’re coughing. In that case, wear a mask and stay the hell away from others. I would say however that wearing a non-occlusive bandanna is useless. Stores should probably not accept this as being compliant with the state guidelines.

At week 7, the economic consequences of this lockdown are becoming apparent. Corporations as diverse as Norwegian Cruise Lines, Lord and Taylor, and J Crew have filed for bankruptcy. More are likely to follow. Businesses are closing prematurely. I worry greatly that the ultimate morbidity (and even mortality) resulting from a severe economic downturn, will be every bit as significant as that from the virus itself.

 If we believe this disease is going to be persistent in the environment, then at some point were going to have either be immunized, or to “face it down “. As the most optimistic timeline for a vaccine is sometime in the late fall or early winter, we have little choice but to open things up in a judicious way, and deal maturely with the bump in diagnoses and deaths that may occur.

So let the snow come on Friday. I know its inevitable that true spring must come, likely soon. Have hope, it’s almost here.

It is now roughly 5 weeks since the spread of the novel coronavirus forced us to shut down the vast majority of our commerce and personal interaction. It’s been a long period with a very unnatural but necessary restriction of our freedoms. At this point, enough time has passed that we are starting to see the trajectory of this pandemic.

In most places, even in New York, the number of new diagnoses, as well as deaths, have either plateaued or are on the downslope. This is not to say that the numbers are small. As I write this, it appears that another 20 people died in my county in the last 24 hours (50 deaths of 1800 total cases).

By all accounts, outside of New York City, hospital systems have not been overwhelmed. Our facility continues to see sporadic cases, none of them particularly severe. Many of these people come from nursing facilities. An emerging problem is the understandable reluctance of those facilities to receive these residents back once they no longer require hospitalization.

I want to discuss several topics related to COVID 19. The first is the topic of ventilators. When the pandemic started there was enough hype to suggest that these devices were going to be essential for the survival of the species. We all watched the great efforts that were made to procure large numbers in anticipation of a respiratory disaster.

There was also talk in the popular press that severely compromised patients should be kept on a ventilator for at least 14 days prior to “weaning” them. I looked around the pulmonary literature but could find no support for this. Still, I kept seeing this in medical chat rooms and the like. My partner, who is also very experienced in critical care, was equally befuddled.

Roughly a week ago I began to hear a different theme. Suddenly, there arose the theory that ventilators are actually the problem, and that mechanical ventilation is causing damage to the patient’s lungs. Therefore, only oxygen should be given.

Given my career in critical care, none of this has any bearing on reality. Ventilators are used in situations where either the patient’s oxygenation cannot be maintained by the lesser means, and/or when the patient’s own respiratory system can no longer maintain ventilation without fatigue and ultimately respiratory arrest. Beyond this, there is no therapeutic benefit. Actual harm to the lungs can result if ventilator settings are inappropriate. We do think we have learned over the years how to minimize this problem.

We also have intermediate modalities, including oxygen supplementation, “high flow oxygen” and “noninvasive ventilation as “that are delivered by mask, and generally offered long before intubation is considered.

The problem is, these less invasive respiratory modalities have a bad tendency to create aerosols of the patient’s secretions, which, in a small ICU room, puts the staff at risk.  

Also, the actual act of intubation (placing the breathing tube in the trachea) exposes the operator to a high risk of infection. This is even more true when done emergently. Thus, I think there has been a general sense that when the patient is deteriorating, that “securing the airway” in a deliberate fashion, before the crisis, is safer for all concerned than intubating a “crashing” patient.

In ventilated patients, once there is no other factor to prevent it, patients are tested daily to see whether they can breathe on their own once again. If so they are extubated. This is important as endotracheal tubes provide a significant risk of secondary infection, and the enforced inactivity in ventilated patients creates other complications.

The sooner you can get them extubated, out of bed and ambulatory, the better they do. So far as I can tell, other than some interesting nuances about the patient’s lung physiology, there is nothing really truly different about ventilating these patients versus those with other similar critical illnesses.

On other fronts, as antibody testing proceeds, we are started to get a sense that many more in the population have been infected then we ever expected. In some ways, this is good news as it suggests there may be many more recovered people about, and we are closer to herd immunity. it also drops the case fatality rate, perhaps significantly.

Unfortunately, this is a little comfort to the roughly 47,000 people have died. Even if the death rate approaches that of the flu, the denominator for the flu is always based on symptomatic patients, who are the only people we test. There is little sense in the literature that influenza, unlike coronavirus, can be asymptomatic.

There is evidence that in the first quarter of 2020 the overall death rate in the United States is not particularly high. This is curious. Some of this may be due to the “cause of death substitution”. It may also be due to decreased opportunities for auto accidents and other trauma, given the social isolation.

I don’t think however it diminishes the extraordinary number of deaths in unique situations like New York City where reliance on public transportation and population density seems to have affected them exponentially. I have no desire to downplay the severity of this pandemic.

Nonetheless, I continue to believe if we are to prevent a severe economic recession if not depression, we need to adapt to current reality, and reopen commerce in a thoughtful way. I look at vast states like Wyoming and Montana where there are less than a quarter of the cases than in my little county. Is it fair to ask them to remain “locked down”?

 There is probably no way to do this without some risk, and we have to know that some degree of increased spread will occur. We need to steel ourselves for this and not panic when it happens.

This can only occur if the political factions in this country stop attacking each other for political gain, every time there is bad news. That must stop. This is too serious now.

I hope you and your loved ones, are safe and well.

Let’s see what this next week brings

With the introduction of the Fujifilm x100V, those of us with its predecessor, the F model, are faced with a dilemma. Are the improvements to the new camera, which was already a wonderful instrument for photography, so compelling to prompt an upgrade? And if so, what should be the timing, given the trade-in value of our current gear. As I tend to over-analyze things, I have been reading the reviews and trying to decide.

The “V” model indicates the fifth X 100 model in the series. Fujifilm finally (at least for me) finally divulged the code for the various random letters they have assigned to previous models. It turns out “S” stood for second, “T” for third, and “F” for fourth (did everyone else know this?). Now they have apparently decided to go for Roman numerals.

The new camera has several compelling upgrades. Most importantly to me would be a new lens. It is still 23 mm and f2.0 but redesigned to improve overall sharpness, particularly wide open. From the comparison images that I am seeing online, they appear to have succeeded. Happily, my investment in the lens converters for my previous cameras is not lost as they also work on the new lens.

There is apparently a new aluminum/magnesium body that by all accounts improve the aesthetics of the body. More importantly, there is now, weather sealing everywhere but at the lens, which requires the optional filter adapter and a filter to render the camera impervious to dust and water splashes. Bravo Fuji.

There is now a four, rather than three-stop neutral density filter built-in. This will make the camera even more versatile for moving water images.

As always there are changes in the optical viewfinder and increased resolution for the electronic viewfinder and the rear LCD which now can pivot up and down. This was cleverly accomplished without significantly changing the camera’s trim dimensions.

Autofocus is also said to be improved, which seems to happen with each new iteration. This is always welcome.

Probably least important to me is the new 26 megapixel Trans-X 4 sensor. Though there is a slight increase in resolution, I have not been able to detect in the available raw files, much improvement in image quality with this sensor. Things are no worse, however.

So far I have fallen for every new upgrade of the X 100. Will this be the same?

After some thought, have reached the following conclusion:

First off, this is my most commonly used camera. Since I tend to shoot more images with the X 100 family of cameras than anything else I own, an improved version is more compelling than for my other equipment (my Nikon 800E, which I rarely use, is two generations old)

I have not for instance upgraded my X Pro 2 because it functions beautifully for me, and the major improvement; namely the sensor and unusual tilting view screen are not that compelling to me. Plus if Fujifilm improves its lens lineup, this can always be applied to this interchangeable lens body.

With the X 100V, the lens improvement to me is its most compelling feature. Now I could just shoot my X E3 with the 23 mm F2 .0 lens this combination is probably optically superior yet, and is not a lot larger than the X100. But between you and me it’s not the same. For instance, the X E3 lacks the incredibly quiet leaf shutter found in the X 100 series which facilitates discrete candid photography.

As I use this camera for street and event shooting, the tilting screen will be an important improvement allowing me to more conveniently shoot from below the waist and overhead.

So it’s obvious I intend to move forward with this. I’m not sure whether to buy it once it is released or to wait, perhaps for a price drop. I’m pretty sure this is unlikely to happen in less than a year unless the camera’s sales disappoint. I’m pretty sure that won’t happen however given the number of used X 100F’s already appearing on eBay.

It appears that my current camera may be added to those listings.

As I have written before, I like snow. This makes me somewhat of an outlier among my friends in northeastern Pennsylvania. Sadly, at least for me, this winter is panning out to be a bust in that regard. Even in the highlands where I reside, we have been experiencing tepid little 1 to 2-inch snowfalls, which will melt before becoming part of a snowpack potentially useful for recreation.

The lack of winter scenery makes photography rather unrewarding. I need to find snow.

In Pennsylvania, that means traveling north and west where the climate is colder, and the high terrain, closer to the Great Lakes can capture the lake effect precipitation. On a whim, I packed my car with gear and set my nav system with the destination of Wellsboro Pennsylvania in Tioga County.

Now I used to spend a lot of time in Wellsboro as it is located in the middle of an absolutely glorious wilderness area where I have mountain biked, skied, and backpacked. My children will remember camping there, to visit Pennsylvania’s “Grand Canyon”, also known as the Pine Creek Gorge.

Now I have always felt the former moniker was a bit pretentious, as there are equally dramatic features, in other parts of the state. I think of the Loyalsock Gorge at World’s End State Park, not to mention our own Lehigh River Gorge. Nonetheless, someone in Tioga County had the marketing chutzpah to grab the name and so it stands.

In the last 10 years, I’ve unconsciously I think avoided traveling the back roads of northern Pennsylvania. During much of that time, the fracking boom caused enormous traffic congestion as legions of tanker trucks bringing water to the fracking sites made travel unpleasant. As much of the fracking is over, I felt comfortable that a trip might be pleasant.

A trip from my home to Wellsboro, is about more than the destination, as the intervening scenery is also rather beautiful. It becomes important to resist the navigation system’s first impulse which is to keep you on route 80 W. It is better to use one of the more scenic state routes. In this case, I drove north to Route 118 which goes almost to Williamsport, and a short stint on Interstate 180, then to route 15 for most of the way to Wellsboro. The inefficiency of this route caused my navigation system to complain for a surprising amount of the trip before it finally caught on.

My camera gear for the trip was all Fujifilm, in this case, the X100F for street style shooting, and my XE3 with multiple lenses for landscape work. Both cameras recharge from USB and are light and compact.

The drive on Route 118 takes you through first forest areas, as it tracks south of North Mountain, arguably the southern front of the high Allegheny plateau. As you approach Williamsport, the altitude drops and the land flattens out to the vast farmland, so prevalent in the center of the state.

A short trip on route I-180 takes you to route 15 N, where you begin a pretty dramatic climb into the “endless mountain” region of the state.

Feeling hungry, I stopped at the town of Morris Pennsylvania, nestled in a creek valley among the overlooking ridges. I love small-town bar/restaurants and the Crossroads Inn is a wonderful example. Rustic but clean, it featured a robust menu that reportedly draws people from as far south as Williamsport, particularly for the roast beef. I share a lot of interests with the locals there, and the conversation turned to deer hunting, timbering and trout stocking.

I arrived in Wellsboro, as I planned about 2 PM to a hazy sky and the temperature in the mid-30s. Not wishing to waste time, I drove west out of town to Leonard Harrison State Park, which is the eastern overlook to the Gorge. My hope was to grab a tripod and photograph the multiple small waterfalls on the “Turkey Trail”, a path that leads from the rim to the floor of the canyon, but there were ice and snow present and thus the trail was closed for fear of injuries. As I was alone I elected not to poach. As the afternoon light improved, I shot images from the observation areas (I had no snow scenes of the canyon from the past).

As pretty as the canyon is, there’s also beauty to be found along the way. To the west of Wellsboro is an area of high rolling farmland that extends almost to the rim of the canyon itself. I remember many years ago hiking in the remote wilderness of the “West Rim Trail” along the gorge while watching a farmer cutting hay on the opposite side.

There are lovely old farmsteads on this network of back roads along with a smattering of churches of similar vintage.

At sunset, I returned to town, to claim my room at the Penn Wells Lodge, a very nice modern facility. My outside entrance room cost all of $87 and included a free breakfast.

Dinner was at a highly recommended restaurant called the Wellsboro House. I had a great meal and a lot of fun with a lovely crew of servers and wait staff.

The next morning once fortified, I took a walk around town to see what changed in the years since I’ve last visited.

Wellsboro itself is a wonderful self-sufficient town, the kind that often develops when there is no bigger city nearby. Though a tourist destination because of the canyon, it is obviously a full-service place of residence, with clothing stores, a furniture store, and a department store that all appear locally owned.

Heading out of town west, there is a neighborhood of beautiful old homes, some of which serve as bed-and-breakfasts.

Even in the dead of winter, the town is neat and clean, the historic storefronts, for the most part, occupied and decorated. There are a number of bars and restaurants, which from my experience in the past serve solid food in generous portions. There is a sense of civic pride, and apparently an interest in the arts, as there appeared to be multiple facilities dedicated to the pursuit.

I’m still not sure why there is a statue in the town park dedicated to the poem “Wynkin, Blinkin, and Nod”, rather than to some town founder or local military hero. Maybe I just lack a sense of whimsy.

I was looking forward to the trip home. To complete the scenic loop, I had decided to use State route 6 for the eastward leg of the trip home. This drive is one of the most beautiful in the state, as you travel past areas of rolling farmland, and scenic overlooks.

Unfortunately, fracking is still occurring and I got stuck behind two tanker trucks who drove annoyingly slowly, and far enough apart that it was unsafe to pass.

Driving along Route 6 there is a phenomenon I’ve noticed in the past. As you drive it seems that every other small town appears extremely rundown and impoverished, while the others are charming and well-maintained. It does remind one how fragile the economy can be in rural Pennsylvania.

My travels finally brought me to the town of Dushore, where I could finally part company with my buddies in the trucks. Here I turned south on to route 487 over Red Rock Mountain back to Route 118. Somewhat ironically it turned out that at the top of the mountain, at Ricketts Glen State Park, there was ample snow for recreation at a location roughly 40 minutes from my home.

Writing travelogues is not my usual deal. But in point of fact, the “Endless Mountain” region of Pennsylvania, stretching across most of the north is a spectacular destination easily reached by a large portion of the population of the Northeast. It’s not all beautiful, but for the most part, the scenery is gorgeous, rivaling places like Vermont and Maine. It’s well worth the trip.

Just watch out for tanker trucks.

Cell phone cameras have many uses. I use mine to take quick snaps of documents, serial number plates or VIN numbers on cars or power equipment, or to take a quick image of someone’s business card. I send “food porn” of my barbecue efforts to my fellow cooks and product shots to Craigslist. For legal reasons. I have documented auto accidents I have experienced. All of this is very useful in my life.

Notice however that among the things I use my camera phone for, actual creative photography is not among them. I far prefer having a “real camera” at hand for those sorts of images, and I generally do. However, there are those times, when a potential image appears before me, and I am “unarmed”. Under these circumstances, I am forced to make do with my smartphone camera. These images tend to build up in my phone’s image files, among the images of serial number badges, tractor parts, and documents I need to send along to others.

Roughly once a year I take the time to pull these pictures out of my phone on the vague hope that they will be editable into her useful image. So in terms of this year, This is what I got.

Cell phone cameras, in general, are lousy for true creative photography. There are a variety of reasons for this. #1 They tend to have a very wide-angle lens, which unless you understand how to shoot wide, tend to produce flat-looking boring images. I know now that several cameras offer multiple focal lengths which will be helpful for subject isolation and less distorted portraits, but mine does not.

 They also tend to shoot in a wide format aspect ratio which can also be challenging in terms of framing.

The lenses typically are not particularly high quality. The bigger technical problem tends to be the imagers, which are very small, with lots of tiny pixels that, because of their size tend to create a fairly low signal to noise ratio(bad).

Recently a number of more thoughtful cell phone manufacturers have decreased the megapixel count of their photo chips, which improves image quality at the expense of resolution. My Samsung Galaxy S8, which is hardly a new camera phone, has a 12-megapixel imager, down from the 16 megapixels of its predecessor. Still, it’s pretty noisy, particularly shot indoors. Because of this, the dynamic range is rather limited.

I’ve written other articles here, where I give examples of comparison images between my Sony Rx 100, which has a still small, but much larger than a cell phone imager. It also has a much better lens. Real cameras work better.

Now that she isn’t to say that cell phones can’t produce enjoyable images. They just need to be viewed small, on phones or tablets. I find that when I try to actually print a smartphone image, I’ve got to keep the print size way down for them to look like anything reasonable. Generally, I don’t even try to print them at all.

Now there are some things you can do, to try and improve your cell phone results. My Samsung has the ability to shoot raw files, which makes them more editable in software.

 I have my phone set up with separate screen icons, that take me either to the camera’s normal mode where I can shoot Jpegs or the so-called “pro mode” where the camera will shoot raw. This latter mode offers me additional exposure and focus adjustments I can access prior to acquiring the image. One frustration that I have is that the raw images on the phone, despite the fact that they are recorded as the proprietary Photoshop. dng raw file, do not display in Photoshop unless I download them to my computer. This can make rooting out an individual image somewhat troublesome.

Still, if I come upon a scene that seems congruent with the focal length and the aspect ratio of the device, I will attempt a capture. Most times I end up deleting the image, but once in a while, I will save them for future use on my computer hard drive. Oh, and make sure your lens is clean.

So what is my message from all of this? I guess what I want people to understand, is that despite all the hype from the manufacturers about the incredible performance of their phone’s cameras, in most cases, it will be markedly inferior to a modest, larger sensor photography device. People should not view their camera phones as replacements for real photo gear, but perhaps as adjuncts, relatively low quality but always at hand.

Though I do have some nice-looking food porn.

Autumn has come to an end on the Pocono Plateau.  Not so much the calendar season, as that ends with the winter solstice.  But photographically, the season was over after a late October nor’ easter which stripped most of the trees of their remaining leaves. Soon nature followed with early season snow.  For now, winter seems to have begun.

It was a lovely fall this year.  There was a lot of mild dry weather that delayed the foliage peak by about a week. There were rich colors contrasting the sodden flat season we experienced last year.

Here in northeastern Pennsylvania, the first signs of autumn occur in late August while it is still rather warm.  Here and there the uniform green will be touched here and there by yellows and reds.  The small maples, who tend to leaf out in the early spring to grab at sunshine before the canopy closes over, are also the first to turn in the fall.  It is the sight of their bright red-orange leaves, scattered over the foliage and the ground that heralds the more colorful times to come.

The larger maples are often the next to go.  Soon the poplars, beeches, and hickories, will change.  Underneath them, the forest floor is transformed by the bright orange of the Cinnamon ferns, and the pale yellows of the hay-scented variety, accented by the deep red of the low-bush blueberry and other heaths that carpet our woodlands.

The holdouts tend to be the oak trees, the prevalent species on most of our local ridge tops.  They stubbornly stay green until the rest of the trees have passed their peak, finally displaying a variety of orange and crimson colors to the fading forest.

I for one truly enjoy the fall, particularly the midseason with temperatures in the high fifties and low sixties.  This affords me the option of wearing sweaters once again, the better to cover my lumpy sixty+ year old body.  I enjoy finally being able to shoot deliberately, often with a tripod without being assaulted by legions of biting insects. I love the cool crisp mornings with frost coating the landscape.

Now in mid-November, as I write this, the ground is covered with a light coating of snow. It has been rather cold for several days with daytime highs in the high 20’s  The deer are acting strangely, moving about in larger groups a way one seldom sees in the summer.  Unfortunately, one particular little buck wandered in front of my pickup truck in the last week, causing considerable damage, and ending his short life.

I have not seen a bear in several weeks. I hope they are “denning up” so that my garbage can go out in the evening rather than in the early morning shortly before the truck arrives.

In this season, I occupy my time by gathering and splitting firewood to fill my woodshed. Once the leaves on my lawn are dealt with, it becomes time to change my equipment over to the tools of snow removal.

So now we have an early taste of winter.  Unlike most people I know, I actually hope that this is a sign of what’s to come, as, without snow, winter to me is just a bleak brown season devoid of recreational and photographic opportunity.

Now,  as it is dark shortly after work, I must content myself with a book and a warm fire.

Hopefully soon, the real winter will begin.

I love buying new camera gear.  It is a wonderful pleasure to unbox an instrument that will help to facilitate new opportunities in photography.  Increasingly, however, it is difficult to improve upon current levels of technology, which even in modestly priced camera equipment, allows users to capture beautiful imagery in a wide range of settings.

Fujifilm recently teased the imminent release of the X Pro 3, the third version of their now-iconic range finder style camera.  As I have owned and used both of the previous X Pro versions, I was eager to see what improvements Fujifilm might have in store to tempt me into the newest product.  The details that have been released, leave me and with more questions than answers.

We know some details about the camera.  We know that rather than a body made from magnesium, the X Pro 3’s structure is fashioned from titanium, which is stronger, lighter, and more damage-resistant than previous bodies.

There are several new finishes available on the camera which also enhance the resistance to scratches and scuffs.

There is, as almost always with a new release, an improvement to the hybrid viewfinder which is been a signature feature of this line.  Apparently, the electronic viewfinder has a higher resolution, likely a faster refresh rate, and more sophisticated color reproduction.

It appears that the four-way controller on the X Pro 2 has been eliminated, as Fujifilm has done with several earlier releases.  I find for instance, on my XE3, that the joystick is a perfectly reasonable substitute.

Most significantly, we have an unusual change to the rear LCD.  There are actually two rear LCDs now.  The one on the back of the camera is a compact LCD similar to those seen on the top panel of the medium format cameras, as well as the XH 1.  This is mainly to show things like camera settings up.  It can also be set up to display what would have been in the past the end panel of a film box appropriate to the film simulation one has selected.  This will certainly bring back memories to those of us who shot in the film era. 

The actual view screen is hidden in normal use but can be accessed as a hinged panel which one folds down allowing for waist-level photography.  It does not otherwise articulate, however.

What up has not yet been revealed are details about things like Autofocus, video capability, and the sensor though the latter is presumed to be the 28-megapixel Trans X sensor found in the XT3.  At least in that camera, the sensor was not a clear improvement over the previous 24-megapixel sensor, particularly in aspects such as high ISO capability for resolution.

Again were lacking a lot of detail here, but once again I find myself thinking that this upgraded model does not feel like a compelling purchase.

First off, I tend to use the X Pro cameras for weddings and other event photography.  The current body has never felt particularly heavy or burdensome, in fact, it has a very solid well-built feel that perhaps would be lost if the titanium version weighs significantly less.  Also, titanium is quite expensive. Just what will this mean for the retail price of the X Pro 3 remains to be seen.

The rear LCD arrangement I think is a lost opportunity.  I actually like the idea of the compact LCD display new camera settings, and sentimentally, the box label styled indicator of the film simulation.  This is apparently Fujifilm’s little manipulation to keep us looking through the viewfinder and to minimize “chimping”, emphasizing traditional photography. I’m not sure that’s any of their business.

In my camera cabinet, I have a relic of the past, a Panasonic GH1.  I keep it because it has an interesting color signature, and is capable of decent video.  It has my favorite rear LCD of all time, a viewfinder capable of either being displayed on the back of the camera, viewed from above or below, or even from the front of the camera. 

I especially like that it can be folded so the rear viewfinder is against the camera body and protected from scratches.  To me, this style of viewfinder,  perhaps with the small LCD on the opposite side,  would have been a more interesting addition to the new camera It would allow users to work however they wished, rather than having their workflow dictated by Fujifilm.

This new design however, is not that disruptive to my usual workflow as I tend to shoot through the viewfinder. It will likely be a problem for other potential buyers.  It seems like an unforced error.

Fujifilm like everyone else struggles with the problem of upgrading current models that are already excellent.  We do not have all the details of this new camera, but so far I’m not sure I’m going to upgrade my X Pro 2 which is a joy to shoot and is capable of capturing beautiful imagery.

I’d like to be wrong, however. 

I hate to miss an unboxing.

Recently, I made the decision to reduce my work hours, in the hopes of traveling more and indulging my other interests. I now have a benign, and more flexible work-life that I hope will allow me to continue to be happy and productive into my 70s.

Some of the travel I’ve been doing involves fairly short overnight trips to different parts of the region.  I like to pack light.  I generally take two camera bodies, one my X100 F , and an interchangeable lens Fuji like the XE-3, with several lenses.  All this fits into my Think Tank Retrospective 7 bag, which can also accommodate a 10-inch tablet.  The problem has been, finding the right tablet.    

As I have an aversion to anything Apple, I have relied on Android-based devices. Though usable, Android is not really compatible with Photoshop, or other photo editing programs that I generally use. It also can be cumbersome for general computing tasks. My ideal device seemed like a small (10-12 inch) Windows laptop for quick trips.

I learned perhaps 6 months ago, about the Windows Surface Go, a smaller version of the Windows Surface tablets that have been well received by the PC community. I promptly ordered one and have been using it for the last several months.

I’ve been exposed to the Microsoft Surface Line, through my computer engineer son who has been using one for several years.  They tend to be nicely designed and seem rather rugged.

The Surface G is similar in build quality with a sturdy metal body, and a very useful “kickstand” built into the device so that it can stand upright.  What I would call a mandatory option is the slick keyboard/cover which rather elegantly attaches by magnets to the tablet.  The overall package is slim and compact, more so for instance than my previous Asus tablet/keypad combinations.  I can carry it with all accessories, including a mouse and card reader, in a small tablet case.

It has a very nice touch pad screen though with a somewhat thick bezel, likely to facilitate holding without activating the screen.  It has a typical Surface magnetic charge port, a slot for the micro sd card,  and a USB C port, for connecting peripherals. It can also charge via USB which is rather handy.   

A nice touch is dual speakers on the wide axis of the device which sound surprisingly good.

All of these features are nice, but as I’m processing Fujifilm raw files, processing power, as well as screen quality,   is rather important.

The Surface Go that I acquired is the higher performance of the two models.  It comes with an Intel Pentium Gold 4415Y processor, 8 GB of ram and 128 GB Of storage.  This is much less robust than the typical I series Intel chip in the bigger Surface devices. 

The tablet sports a 10 inch 1800X1200 touch screen, with a bit less resolution than the typical ipad of the same size.  Nonetheless, it is rather bright, and to my eye shows excellent detail.  I was able to color calibrate it rather easily. The tablet uses an Intel HD Graphics 615 card.

I am obviously not in the business of testing computer equipment, but the more professional reviews I read suggest that the overall the graphics performance of this computer along with the color gamut are well above average for inexpensive laptop type devices.

A welcome feature of the device is the “Windows Hello” which uses facial recognition to log you in. I wish my other computers would support this.

So how does it perform? I’ve installed a number of photo processing programs including Adobe Lightroom, Irident Transformer, and the free version of Capture One for Fujifilm. All of them run reasonably well but definitely slower than the i7 processors that run my big laptop and desktop computers.  Raw file conversion is a little slow but not obnoxious, and faster than on my previous Asus transformer (on which I could only run Photo mate).

This is not really a computer for editing bulk files or creating panoramas, but it works perfectly well to edit and preview individual images on the road. You will need to buy a USB C to USB 3 hub to use your card readers and other peripherals.

Obviously, the small screen is less than optimal for running photo editing software, the obvious price for portability

It is really helpful to have a Windows-based computer that is so portable that it just isn’t a problem to stick it in your camera bag so you can review your files for instance at a breakfast restaurant after a morning in the field.

One criticism of this device has been battery life.  Those people who test these devices professionally have noted that the battery life is somewhat below average for tablets.  There is some drain over time when the device is not in use, but overall I find it not a problem.  The included charger is rather small, fits easily in the bag, and quickly connects magnetically to the device.  The USB C port means I can even charge the device in my car as I drive from location to location.  I have noted however that you need a fairly high current charger to replenish the battery.

Overall, I’m very pleased with the Surface Go. Sure its screen is small, and you have to remember to keep it charged. Nevertheless, it feels like a full-featured Windows PC that I can open on a bar or a lunch counter and not feel awkward.

Pretty much, what I’ve been looking for.

I’ve been reading the early reviews on the revolutionary Fujifilm GFX 100 camera body, one of the most spectacularly capable and forward-looking products ever released since the dawn of digital photography roughly 20 years ago.  It has caused me to reflect back on my journey as a longtime Fujifilm shooter.

I remember the beginnings, which were oh, so different.

As I have noted before, on this site, I have a strange penchant for underdogs.  I must unconsciously seek out quirky and unconventional products, that are outside the mainstream.  In the 1990s, when everybody else was buying BMWs, I bought a Subaru SVX, a strange looking but lovely four-wheel-drive coupe.  My newest barbecue pit, a Hasty Bake, a charcoal cooker that is been made in roughly the same form since 1947.  I persist in using my Gravely G Series garden tractor, a stout design from the 1960s, rather than a more modern design from John Deere, or Kubota. 

And I’m a Fujifilm shooter.

I first became interested in the brand round about 2002.  At that point as a former film shooter I had been dabbling with a variety of point and shoot digital cameras, finally graduating to the Olympus E10/20 series. These sort of looked like digital SLRs, but had a fixed lens and a smaller sensor.  As I had some Nikon lenses, I was looking for a body with the Nikon F mount.  In my price range, that meant either a Nikon D100 or this weird camera from Fujifilm, called the S2 pro. 

The Nikon and the Fujifilm were based on a Nikon film body, the N 80 prosumer SLR. The D 100 was a fairly well-integrated product much like modern designs with good performance for the times. The Fujifilm, however, was a weird sort of hybrid, which many reviewers referred to as a “frankencamera” as the digital side of the camera, was obviously grafted to the mechanical parts in a much cruder way.

This manifested for instance, in the need for two types of batteries, a CR 44 to power the body functions, and two AA batteries, for the digital side.  The camera was slower and did not focus as well as its Nikon competition.  And it used weird memory cards.  But much like today, it offered an unusual sensor, with a diagonal rather than a square grid pattern, then offered higher resolution and better low light performance than the conventional sensor in the Nikon.  Plus, even then, Fujifilm color science was better.

Needless to say, given my proclivities, I bought the Fujifilm.  And I have never looked back.

I followed that camera with the S3 Pro and S5 pro bodies.  In each case, the integration and sensors of the camera improved, but the performance was always a step behind the mainstream SLRs, in terms of functionality and at times, resolution. 

Eventually, when Fujifilm stopped making DSLRs, I drifted over to Nikon digital bodies.  I still have a D800E that serves me well when I need it.

Then, in 2011, I acquired my first X100.  Once again, it had wonderful picture quality, but now a beautiful design, and a gorgeous lens, but was slow, with unreliable autofocus.  This remained a pattern for many years with subsequent camera offerings including the X Pro 1 and XT1, both of which did not perform at a level of their immediate competition.  Happily, these cameras were improved significantly over time due to Fujifilm’s continual firmware updates.

But over time, this penchant for releasing immature cameras is changing.  I think it’s clear that the last round of product offerings, the XT3 in particular, for the first time are seen as a highly competitive, if not clearly superior products compared for instance, to the Sony, and Nikon equivalents.

Enter the GTX 100.  Now we have a product that literally leapfrogs, over its competition, offering huge resolution (100 megapixels), in a beautifully designed professional level body.  It is the first medium format camera with image stabilization, as well as video features that rival anything in this format.  Now the body is quite expensive, too rich for my blood, at $10,000. However its nearest competitor, the Hasselblad H6D-100c is $28,000 for essentially the same (though non-stabilized) sensor without talking about very expensive Hasselblad glass.   The Fujifilm GFX lens line is also very high quality but proportionally priced.  One can buy a very nice Fujifilm GFX 100 body and lens collection for significantly less than the price of the Hasselblad body alone.

It’s so much fun, as one who remembers the bad old days of weird Fujifilm cameras, to see the brand emerge as a major mainstream force in the industry.

I think we’re finally done with “frankencameras”.