Technology Tales

Pandemic camera

Back at the end of 2019, I acquired a Canon EOS 90D, possibly the swansong for mid-range Canon SLR cameras. Much effort is going into mirrorless cameras, yet I retain affection for SLR cameras because of their optical viewfinders. That may have been part of the reason for the acquisition, when I already had an ageing Pentax K5 Mark II. Buying SLR cameras is one way to keep them in production.

Little did I know what lay ahead in 2020 at that stage. Until recently, this was not to be a camera that travelled widely, such were the restrictions. Nevertheless, battery life is superb and handling is good too. The only absence is not having a level in the viewfinder like the Pentax K3 Mark III or maybe any mirrorless camera.

The newer file type of CR3 caught me out at first until I adjusted my command line tooling to deal with that. File sizes were larger as well, which has an impact on storage. Otherwise, there was little to change in my workflow. That would take other technological changes, like the increasing amount of AI being built into Adobe software.

Outdoor photography is my mainstay, and it excelled at that. The autofocus works well on its 24 to 135 mm zoom lens, except perhaps from focussing on skyscapes at times. Metering produced acceptable results, though it differed from the Pentax output to which I had become accustomed. All in all, it slipped into a role like other cameras that I had.

Throughout 2020 and 2021, it provided the required service alongside other cameras that I had. The aforementioned Pentax remained in use, like an Olympus and another Canon. Overseas travel curtailed horizons, so it was around local counties like Cheshire, Derbyshire, Staffordshire and Shropshire. In September 2020, it travelled to Llandudno in North Wales, an exception to the general trend of English hikes and cycles.

Since then, it has been superseded, though. A Pentax K3 Mark III made it into my possession to become my main camera, returning me near enough to my pre-2020 practice. Curiosity about Canon mirrorless options added a Canon EOS RP and a 24 to 240 mm zoom lens. That has shorter battery life than is ideal, and its level is not as helpful as that on the Pentax K3 Mark III or the aforementioned Olympus. If anything, it may get replaced while the EOS 90D remains. My getting a new base in Ireland means that it has gone there to save me carrying a camera there from England. That should give it a new lease of life.

Getting Adobe Lightroom Classic to remember the search filters that you have set

With Windows 10 support to end in October 2025 and VirtualBox now offering full support for Windows 11, I have moved onto Windows 11 for personal use while retaining Windows 10 for professional work, at least for now. Of course, a lot could happen before 2025 with rumours of a new Windows version, the moniker Windows 12 has been mooted, but all that is speculation for now.

As part of the changeover, I moved the Adobe apps that I have in an ongoing subscription, Lightroom Classic and Photoshop are the main ones for me, to the new virtual machine. That meant that some settings from the previous one were lost and needed reinstating.

One of those was the persistence of Library Filters, so I had to find out how to get that sorted. If my memory is not fooling me, this seemed to be a default action in the past, and that meant that I was surprised by the change in behaviour.

Nevertheless, I had to go to the File menu, select Library Filters (it is near the bottom of the menu in the current version at the time of writing) and switch on Lock Filters by clicking on it to get a tick mark preceding the text. There is another setting called Remember Each Source's Filters Separately in the same place that can be set in the same manner if so desired, and I am experimenting with that at the moment, even though I have not bothered with this in the past.

EVF or OVF?

In photography, some developments are temporary fads, while others create enduring changes. Special effects filters and high dynamic range techniques generated excitement before their usage became more restrained. The same applies to most image processing techniques, as good taste eventually prevails. Some developments, however, signal more substantial shifts.

The biggest example of the latter is the move away from film photography to digital image capture. There still are film photographers who largely depend on older cameras, since very few are made any more. While my own transition came later than others, I hardly use film any more, and a lack of replacement parts for cameras that are more than fifteen years old only helps to keep things that way. Another truth is that digital photography makes me look at my images more critically, which helps me improve.

Also, mobile phone cameras have become so capable that the compact camera market has shrunk dramatically. In fact, I gave away my Canon PowerShot G11 earlier this year because there was little justification in hanging onto it. After all, it dated back to 2010 and a phone would do now what it once did, though the G11 did more for me than I might have expected. Until 2017, my only photos of Swedish locations were made with that camera. If I ever was emotional at its departure, and I doubt that I was, that is not felt now.

If you read photography magazines, you get the sense that mirrorless cameras have captured a lot of the limelight, and that especially is the case with the introduction of full frame models. Some writers even are writing off the chances of SLR's remaining in production, though available model ranges remain extensive despite the new interlopers. Whatever about the departure of film, the possible loss of SLR's with their bright optical viewfinders (OVF's) does make me a little emotional since they were the cameras that, so many like me aspired to owning during my younger years and the type has served me well over the decades.

Even so, I too have used mirrorless cameras and an Olympus PEN E-PL5 came into my possession in 2013. However, I found that using the screen on the back of a camera was not to my liking and the quality of mobile phone cameras is such that I no longer need any added portability. However, it needs to be remembered that using a Tamron 14 to 150 mm zoom lens with the body cannot have helped either. Wishing to sample a counterpart with an electronic view finder, I replaced it with an Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III earlier this year and have been getting on fine with that.

The camera body is compact, yet handles like an SLR. I turned off the automatic switching between viewfinder and screen because I found it distracting. I prefer to switch between them manually. Getting used to the electronic viewfinder (EVF) took some time, but adding a spirit level overlay proved both useful and educational. The camera produces images with strong greens and blues, which suits me since I like both colours. The 16.1 megapixel sensor creates smaller files that upload quickly to back-up services. My Tamron lens works flawlessly, and keeping this lens was a key reason I stayed with Olympus despite a shutter failure on my previous camera. The repair was done efficiently and at a reasonable price.

Despite the quality of the new Olympus, it has not replaced my Canon EOS 5D Mark II and Pentax K5 II SLRs. The Olympus has a much smaller frame. In January, I bought a new Sigma 24 to 105 mm zoom lens for the Canon after my older lens developed a fault that could not be fixed. The new lens performs well and produces impressively sharp images. However, the full frame Canon setup is heavy, even when used handheld. This is why the Pentax remains my choice for travelling abroad. Both the Canon and Pentax offer brighter viewfinders, which I value. Therefore, the OM-D complements rather than replaces my other cameras.

Although I can work with electronic viewfinders (EVF's) if single-lens reflex cameras (SLRs) become obsolete, I plan to use mainly SLRs for now. Canon recently launched a new enthusiast model, indicating ongoing interest in SLRs. Canon appears to envision a hybrid approach where using the screen on the back of the camera might provide faster autofocus or other functions, while the optical viewfinder (OVF) allows traditional operation. This makes me wonder if future cameras might include viewfinders that switch between EVF and OVF modes. This idea might be both far-fetched and fascinating, but other unforeseen possibilities might exist. One thing is certain: we live in a time of rapid change.

Rethinking photo editing

Photo editing has been something that I have been doing since my first-ever photo scan in 1998 (I believe it was in June of that year but cannot be completely sure nearly twenty years later). Since then, I have been using a variety of tools for the job and wondered how other photos can look better than my own. What cannot be excluded is my preference for being active in the middle of the day when light is at its bluest, as well as a penchant for using a higher ISO of 400. In other words, what I do when making photos affects how they look afterwards as much as the weather that I had encountered.

My reason for mentioning the above aspects of photographic craft is that they affect what you can do in photo editing afterwards, even with the benefits of technological advancement. My tastes have changed over time, so the appeal of re-editing old photos fades when you realise that you only are going around in circles and there always are new ones to share, so that may be a better way to improve.

When I started, I was a user of Paint Shop Pro but have gone over to Adobe since then. First, it was Photoshop Elements, but an offer in 2011 lured me into having Lightroom and the full version of Photoshop. Nowadays, I am a Creative Cloud photography plan subscriber, so I get to see new developments much sooner than once was the case.

Even though I have had Lightroom for all that time, I never really made full use of it and preferred a Photoshop-based workflow. Lightroom was used to select photos for Photoshop editing, mainly using adjustments for such things as tones, exposure, levels, hue and saturation. Removal of dust spots, resizing and sharpening were other parts of a still minimalist approach.

What changed all this was a day spent pottering about the 2018 Photography Show at the Birmingham NEC during a cold snap in March. That was followed by my checking out the Adobe YouTube Channel afterwards, where there were videos of the talks featured every day of the four-day event. Here are some shortcuts if you want to do some catching up yourself: Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, and Day 4. Be warned though that these videos are long in that they feature the whole day and there are enough gaps that you may wish to fast-forward through them. Even so, there is quite a bit of variety of things to see.

Of particular interest were the talks given by the landscape photographer David Noton who sensibly has a philosophy of doing as little to his images as possible. It helps that his starting points are so good that adjusting black and white points with a little tonal adjustment does most of what he needs. Vibrancy, clarity and sharpening adjustments are kept to a minimum, while some work with graduated filters evens out exposure differences between skies and landscapes. It helps that all this can be done in Lightroom, so that set me thinking about trying it out for size, and the trick of using the backslash (\) key to switch between raw and processed views is a bonus granted by non-destructive editing. Others may have demonstrated the creation of composite imagery, but simplicity is more like my way of working.

It is confusing that we now have cloud-based Lightroom CC, while the previous desktop version is called Lightroom Classic CC. Although the former offers easy dust spot removal and other features, I prefer the latter because I do not want to upload my entire image library, and I already use Google Drive and Dropbox for off-site backup. The mobile app is interesting since it allows capturing images on mobile devices in Adobe's raw DNG format. My workflow is now more Lightroom-based than before, and I appreciate the new technology, especially as Adobe develops its Sensai artificial intelligence engine. Because Adobe has access to numerous images through Lightroom CC and Adobe Stock (formerly Fotolia), it has abundant data to train this AI system.

Batch conversion of DNG files to other file types with the Linux command line

At the time of writing, Google Drive is unable to accept DNG files, the Adobe file type for RAW images from digital cameras. While the uploads themselves work fine, the additional processing at the end that, I believe, is needed for Google Photos appears to be failing. Because of this, I thought of other possibilities like uploading them to Dropbox or enclosing them in ZIP archives instead; of these, it is the first that I have been doing and with nothing but success so far. Another idea is to convert the files into an image format that Google Drive can handle, and TIFF came to mind because it keeps all the detail from the original image. In contrast, JPEG files lose some information because of the nature of the compression.

Handily, a one line command does the conversion for all files in a directory once you have all the required software installed:

find -type f | grep -i "DNG" | parallel mogrify -format tiff {}

The find and grep commands are standard, with the first getting you a list of all the files in the current directory and sending (piping) these to the grep command, so the list only retains the names of all DNG files. The last part uses two commands for which I found installation was needed on my Linux Mint machine. The parallel package is the first of these and distributes the heavy workload across all the cores in your processor, and this command will add it to your system:

sudo apt-get install parallel

The mogrify command is part of the ImageMagick suite along with others like convert and this is how you add that to your system:

sudo apt-get install imagemagick

In the command at the top, the parallel command works through all the files in the list provided to it and feeds them to mogrify for conversion. Without the use of parallel, the basic command is like this:

mogrify -format tiff *.DNG

In both cases, the -format switch specifies the output file type, with the tiff portion triggering the creation of TIFF files. The *.DNG portion itself captures all DNG files in a directory, but {} does this in the main command at the top of this post. If you wanted JPEG ones, you would replace tiff with jpg. Should you ever need them, a full list of what file types are supported is produced using the identify command (also part of ImageMagick) as follows:

identify -list format

A Look at a Compact System Camera

In August, I acquired an Olympus Pen E-PL5, and I'm still getting used to it. Its main appeal was combining SLR functionality with compact camera size. This was an upgrade from my Canon PowerShot G11 without the bulk of a larger camera.

When I considered Canon's EOS M before choosing the E-PL5, I was put off by its slow autofocus. The lack of a mode dial was another concern, though its APS-C sensor and price of around £399 were attractive (and I liked Canon's tendency to overexpose when examining images from an old Canon EOS 10D). After seeing a camera comparison in Practical Photography, I bought that issue. They preferred the similarly priced Olympus Pen E-PM2 over the Canon. Though a Panasonic won the test, I was interested enough in the Olympus to research further. Unlike the E-PM2 and EOS M, the E-PL5 has both a mode dial and extra grip, so I chose it despite the higher price. I had noticed discounted Olympus Pen models before, but this purchase was a more deliberate investment.

Breaking my usual preference for black cameras for variety's sake, I chose the silver E-PL5 from the three available colours (black, silver and white). The body is very compact, with the lens taking up most of the bulk. The standard 14-42 mm zoom means this isn't a shirt-pocket camera, so I bought a black Lowepro Apex 100 AW case. The case fits the camera snugly, making me wonder if I should have chosen a larger one, but it's working well. To protect the lens during outings, I also added a 37 mm Hoya HMC UV filter. The lens's plastic construction extends further than I expected and doesn't fully retract into its housing like some of my Sigma lenses.

On my first test run, I needed to work out how to hold the camera. My Canon PowerShot G11's powered zoom and autofocus made it more intuitive to hold, as was true for any SLR I've used. Holding the small body while adjusting the zoom lens was awkward at first. Eventually, I learned to steady the body with my right thumb (the curved thumb grip on the back holds a thumb vertically) while freely adjusting the lens with my left hand. An electronic viewfinder instead of the screen would have made things easier, but they're expensive, and I had already spent enough.

After learning to hold the camera, I needed to adjust to its exposure characteristics. From my experience, it tends to overexpose. Though I set it to store raw (ORF) files that can be fixed later, I prefer more control during capture. Also, I haven't found a spot or partial metering button like those on my SLR or G11. This means either using exposure compensation with aperture priority mode or switching to fully manual exposure. Other familiar modes are available (shutter priority, program, automatic, etc.). While getting familiar with the camera, I'm using bracketing after setting ISO to 400, increasing screen brightness and adding histograms to playback views. As my grip becomes more secure, I'm using the dial to adjust settings like aperture (f/16 remains my favourite despite what others think about micro four thirds sensor size) and compensation, keeping scenes consistent to test the camera's response to changes.

Though I'm still learning, I'm seeing pleasing results that encourage me to continue; some remind me of my Pentax K10D. The E-PL5 is slower to use than the G11, but that's often beneficial for photography. Being forced to slow down in our hectic world is another advantage. The G11 is seeing less use now, with sunny days offering chances for more experimentation and familiarisation. My introduction to compact system cameras has shown they're very different from compact fixed lens cameras or SLRs. Neither type is truly replaced; instead, a new category has emerged.

A display of brand loyalty

Since 2007, I've used a Pentax K10D DSLR as my main camera. It has travelled with me extensively, capturing over 15,000 images and serving reliably. Though its autofocus isn't the fastest, this doesn't matter for my typical subjects: landscapes, architecture, flora and transport (stationary buses and trains, for instance). Any slight underexposure in photos can be easily fixed since I shoot in DNG format, which preserves all raw image data. The camera has performed so well that I've found it difficult to justify buying a new SLR.

Lately, I have been looking at processed photos and asking myself if time has moved along for what is not far from being a six-year-old camera. At various times, I have been looking at higher members of the Pentax while wondering if an upgrade would be a good idea. First, there was the K7 and then the K5 before the K5 II got launched. Even though its predecessor is still to be found on sale, it was the newer model that became my choice.

My move to Pentax in 2007 was a case of brand disloyalty, since I had been a Canon user from when I acquired my first SLR, an EOS 300. Even now, I still have a PowerShot G11 that finds itself slipped into a pocket on many a time. Nevertheless, I find that Canon images feel a little washed out before post-processing, and that hasn't been the case with the K10D. In fact, I have been hearing good things about Nikon cameras delivering punchy results, so one of them would be a contender were it not for how well the Pentax performed.

So, what has my new K5 II body gained me that I didn't have before? For one thing, the autofocus is a major improvement on that in the K10D. It may not stop me persevering with manual focusing for most of the time, but there are occasions the option of solid autofocus is good to have. Other advances include a 16.3 megapixel sensor with a much larger ISO range. The advances in sensor technology since when the K10D appeared may give me better quality photos, and noise is something that my eyes may have begun to detect in K10D photos even at my usual ISO of 400.

Some features will not get used, though. While I rely on Live View with my PowerShot G11 due to its poor optical viewfinder, I rarely use it on the K5 II with its bright, sharp viewfinder, especially after noticing unreliable autofocus when using it (though manual focusing should work fine). By default, the screen stays on constantly, which irritated me as an optical viewfinder user, so I consulted the manual to turn it off. Similarly, I quickly abandoned the image level display. However, I've kept the horizon autocorrection feature enabled, as it helps fix the crooked horizons that often result from handheld shooting.

The K5 II may have a 3" screen on its back, but it has done nothing to increase the size of the camera. If anything, it is smaller than the K10D, and that usefully means that I am not on the lookout for a new camera holster. Not having a bigger body also means there is little change in how the much camera feels in the hand compared with the older one.

In many ways, the K5 II works very like the K10D once I took control over settings that didn't suit me. Both have Shake Reduction in their camera bodies, though the setting has been moved into the settings menu in the new camera, when the older one had a separate switch on its body. Since I'd be inclined to leave it on all the time and prefer not to have it knocked off accidentally, this is not an issue.  Otherwise, many of the various switches are in the same places, so it's not that difficult to find my way around them.

The K5 II includes other changes, like a mode dial lock, but I'm familiar with this feature from Canon EOS cameras, so it doesn't feel like a downgrade. The exposure compensation button has been relocated to the top of the camera, making it easier to find and use; I'm using it more than I did on the K10D. Since I also use this feature on my G11, I'm applying similar experimentation to the K5 II. Next to it is a new ISO button, which I plan to test to see how it performs.

My main criticism of the K5 II is its cluttered menu system. The K10D's long scrollable lists have been replaced with multiple tabs that eliminate on-screen scrolling. However, I think this fragments the interface too much and makes navigating settings more intimidating for less technical users. Essential settings remain accessible; I continue using RAW DNG files as usual, though JPEG and Pentax's proprietary RAW format are also available. After initially forgetting to set the date, I quickly fixed this. Similarly, I disabled the default setting that stores files in date-based folders, instead directing everything to a single PENTX directory to match my workflow. Recently, I discovered the option to add photographer and copyright information to image file metadata. This seems particularly useful given proposed U.K. legislation that would weaken automatic copyright protections, even though most photographers oppose these legal changes.

A camera's true value lies in the quality of its images, and I'm pleased with what the K5 II produces. The larger file sizes mean fewer images fit on a memory card, though increased SDHC capacities help offset this, even as I avoid excessive shooting. While using the camera, I was surprised to find apertures like F/14 and F/18, as I was used to values like F/11, F/13, F/16, F/19, and F/22. Most traditional values remain available, so there's not a complete departure from convention. Similarly with shutter speeds, I noticed 1/100 and 1/160 where I expected only 1/90, 1/125, and 1/250. These additional options provide more flexibility and potentially make achieving correct exposures easier, though what constitutes "correct" should be determined by the photographer, not the camera's algorithms. So far, I've mostly used ISO 400, except for some evening woodland testing shortly after getting the camera.

While I've been meaning to share my thoughts on the K5 II since acquiring it a few months ago, I needed time to organize my ideas. Initially, I felt overwhelmed by how much there was to say, even more than what you've read here. There are still features to explore, like white balance adjustments and their effect on image quality. After discovering its shake reduction was switched off, I'm also reconsidering my K10D, especially since this might explain the quality issues I mentioned earlier. Using my tripod more consistently would be another improvement. Clearly, I have many more photographic explorations ahead.

Command Line Processing of EXIF Image Metadata

There is a bill making its way through the U.K. parliament at this time that could reduce the power of copyright when it comes to images placed on the web. The current situation is that anyone who creates an image automatically holds the copyright for it. However, the new legislation will remove that if it becomes law as it stands. As it happens, the Royal Photographic Society is doing what it can to avoid any changes to what we have now. Though there may be the barrier of due diligence, how many of us take steps to mark our own intellectual property? For one, I have been less that attentive to this and now wonder if there is anything more that I should be doing. While others may copyleft their images instead, I don't want to find myself unable to share my own photos because another party is claiming rights over them. There's watermarking as an object, yet I also want to add something to the image metadata too.

That got me wondering about adding metadata to any images that I post online that assert my status as the copyright holder. It may not be perfect, but any action is better than doing nothing at all. Given that I don't post photos where EXIF metadata is stripped as part of the uploading process, it should be there to see for anyone who bothers to check, and there may not be many who do.

Because I also wanted to batch process images, I looked for a command line tool to do the needful and found ExifTool. Being a Perl library, it is cross-platform so you can use it on Linux, Windows and even OS X. To install it on a Debian or Ubuntu-based Linux distro, just use the following command:

sudo apt-get install libimage-exiftool-perl

The form of the command that I found useful for adding the actual copyright information is below:

exiftool -p "-copyright=(c) John ..." -ext jpg -overwrite_original

The -p switch preserves the timestamp of the image file, while the -overwrite_original one ensures that you don't end up with unwanted backup files. The copyright message goes within the quotes along with the -copyright option. With a little shell scripting, you can traverse a directory structure and change the metadata for any image files contained in different sub-folders. If you wish to do more than this, there's always the user documentation to be consulted.

Three gone...

As of today, Jessops no longer continues to trade. It is but a third specialist purveyor of photographic equipment to go this way. Jacobs, another Leicester headquartered competitor, met the same fate as did the Wildings chain in the northwest of England. These were smaller operations than Jessops who may have overreached itself during the boom years and certainly had their share of financial troubles in recent times, the latest of which putting an end from the operation.

Many are pondering what is happening, and the temptation is to blame the rise of the e-commerce and the economic situation for all of this. In addition, I have seen poor service blamed. However, where are we going to go now after this? Has photography become such a specialised market that you need a diversified business to stick with it? After all, independent retailers have been taking a hammering too and some have gone out of business, like the chains that I have mentioned here.

It does raise the question as to where folk engaging in a photographic purchase are going to go for advice now; is the web sufficiently beginner-friendly? There seemingly will be fewer bricks and mortar shops out there for anyone, so coming across one-to-one advice as once would have been the case is looking harder than it once was. Photographic magazines will help, and the web has a big role to play too. It certainly informed some of my previous purchases, but I have been that little bit more serious about my photography for a while now.

It might be that photography is becoming more specialist again after a period when the advent of digital cameras caused an explosion in interest. Cameras on mobile phones are becoming ever more capable and cannibalising the compact camera market for those only interested in point and shoot machinery. Maybe that is where things are going in that mass market photography doesn't offer the future that it once might have done given the speed of technological advance. The future and present undoubtedly are about as interesting as they have become utterly uncertain.

Thinking over the last ten years or so, there has been a lot of change and that seems set to continue, even if I am left wondering if photography has shot its bolt by now. My first SLR came from a Stockport branch of Jessops and was a film camera, a Canon EOS SLR. It certainly got me going and was exchanged for a Canon EOS 30 from Ffordes, an internet transaction during which the phone system around Manchester and Cheshire went on the blink. That outage may have exposed a frailty of our networked world, but there has been no fire to melt cables in a tunnel since then. Further items from Jessops came via the same channel, such as a Manfrotto 055 tripod and my Pentax K10D. A Canon-fit 28-135 mm Sigma came from Jessops' then Manchester Deansgate store and another Canon-fit Sigma lens, a 70-300 mm telephoto affair, came from another branch of the chain, although not the Macclesfield branch since that had yet to be established and there's no photographic store left in the town now after the Jessops and Wildings closures.

Those purchases have become history, just like the photographic retail chain from which they were sourced. These days, I am more than comfortable with making dealings over the web, but that concern about those starting out that I expressed earlier now remains. Seeing how that would work is set to become interesting. Might it limit the take-up of photography on a more serious basis? That is a question that could get a very interesting answer as we continue into ever more uncertain times.

Dispensing with temptation

Many manufacturers followed Olympus into the compact system camera market. Nikon joined late last year, though Canon hasn't yet entered. Olympus E-PL1 kits with 14-42mm zoom lenses tempted me at around £250. After researching competitors, my shortlist included the Samsung NX-11, Sony NEX-C3, and its higher-end model, the NEX-5N.

What eventually countered the allure of shiny objects was the question as to why I needed such an item. After all, I already possess a Pentax K10D DSLR and a Canon PowerShot G11, and these have been satisfying my photographic needs for a while now. While the DSLR may date from 2007, it is still working well for me and, if it ever needed replacing, I'd be going for another Pentax with the K-5 being a strong contender. The Canon is doing what's asked of it, so the recent launching of the G1 X isn't so tempting either.

The whole dalliance has me wondering about how photographic equipment changeovers come about. After all, it was around a decade ago with the DSLR revolution was in the offing if not in progress. Until then, film photography was predominant, but it looks as if it got as far as it could from a technological point of view when I look back at what happened. The digital photography area was new and untapped, so moving there offered new possibilities and purchases more easily justified. The end result is that very few film cameras are being made nowadays. Ironically, it's film photography that now is untrammelled terrain for many, and it is holding its own too in an era when digital photography predominates.

The same sort of newness that came with digital photography also applies to CSC's to a certain extent. From the heritage of half-frame 35 mm film photography, Olympus has fashioned a different type of digital camera: essentially a compact with interchangeable lenses. Was it the fact that I have no CSC that caused me to be tempted and has it happened to others too? Also, is that what got digital photography going in the first place?

It almost feels as if camera manufacturers have to keep bringing to market new models and new types of camera to stay in business. After all, Minolta had to sell its camera division to Sony when they failed to get going in the DSLR market quickly enough. The same thing might have happened to Pentax too, with the marque passing to first to Hoya, and then to Ricoh after the firm lost its independence.

What doesn't help is the lack of longevity of camera models. The coming of digital photography has exacerbated this situation, with models being launched at a frenetic rate. In the days of film photography, a model could last on the market for a few years and there was once a time when a twenty-year lifetime wouldn't have looked so ridiculous, though there were incremental improvements made over that time too. For instance, a Pentax K1000 wouldn't be the same at the end of its production run as it was at the start, though the model number may be the same. That world is gone.

SLR design has endured for about 50 years, but mirrorless technology now presents unprecedented competition. Even compact cameras offer live through-the-lens viewing. Olympus revived its film heritage by creating the E-P1 with interchangeable lenses. These descendants of the original half-frame 35mm PEN cameras appropriately use smaller micro four thirds sensors. Sony has developed translucent mirror technology that eliminates moving parts found in traditional SLRs. Canon experimented with this in the 1980's with film cameras but abandoned it. Meanwhile, Samsung and Panasonic produce mirrorless SLR-style cameras with live viewing and electronic viewfinders, suggesting full-size equivalents may be coming. Olympus's current teaser campaign has sparked speculation about a possible OM-D release.

In parallel with all this, Sony is making a good impression with their CSC's, the NEX series. These have APS-C sized sensors like many DSLR's and in compact bodies as well. However, the feel very much is that of a compact camera and some have complained of a like of buttons on them, even if the photographic quality is excellent. Samsung have gone for the same sensor size in their NX-11, while they have gone for SLR styling. That may be more suitable for some than having to find settings buried in menus.

We're living in an exciting yet unsettling period of camera technology evolution. Cameras are becoming smaller, and traditional still cameras now shoot videos too, though filmmaking remains a time-intensive hobby that doesn't interest me. Recent legal developments complicate original work, as shown by a successful copyright case based on Photoshop image processing. With countless images being created daily and potential changes allowing intellectual property claims in small claims courts, avoiding infringement becomes harder. Film photography seems appealing in contrast and remains viable despite Kodak's financial struggles. As tastes shift and film becomes novel again, the future is uncertain. Perhaps investing in a DSLR body makes sense before Compact System Cameras completely replace them. Camera technology has become interesting once more.