TOPIC: LIVE PREVIEW
EVF or OVF?
22nd December 2019In 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.
A display of brand loyalty
12th July 2013Since 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.
Dispensing with temptation
26th January 2012Many 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.
A tendency for overexposure?
14th July 2010A recent trip to Sweden saw my Canon PowerShot G11 being put to rather more use than was expected. If I had known what might have been coming my way, I may even have eschewed the principle of lightweight packing to bring along my Pentax DSLR. Nevertheless, the little Canon did whatever was asked of it when light was plentiful.
Once thing that I have noticed in comparison with the Pentax is the Canon's tendency to overexpose a scene. To a point, this can be explained by the former having proper spot-metering and the latter having the less specific partial metering. In fact, that might explain why a Canon EOS 10D SLR in my possession has the same tendency. Maybe it's time to make more use of the Sekonic light meter that I have, but that adds bulk that doesn't fit in with the idea of carrying a compact camera around with you.
That leaves getting more practice with exposure corrections at processing time (I do capture all my photos in raw format). Going further, I am finding that the same consideration appears to apply to image sharpening too. It's almost as if you need to develop a feeling for the results produced by a camera before satisfaction with any acquired photos will follow. Having decent lighting at capture time and not having muck on the sensor helps too, as I have discovered with the photos made used my Pentax K10D on a recent visit to Arran and Argyll. The state of the sensor needs sorting (even if it has an anti-dust system on board) but I sometimes wonder if my judgement of lighting is what it used to be or whether my aspirations have gone too high. Maybe I need to slow down a little to set aside time for working on getting better results and with the right light, a quantity that should come with autumn and winter. Meanwhile, I'll stick with making the best of the British summer.
A new acquisition
16th January 2010Back in the early days of this blog, I mulled over the idea of having a high-end digital compact camera to complement a DSLR that then was delivering very dusty images; that Canon EOS 10D was cleaned since then and comes in for occasional use to this day. That was nearly three years ago, and a first generation Ricoh GR Digital was the item that then was catching my eye. At the time, I failed to justify spending that much money on such a thing and ended up acquiring a new Pentax K10D DSLR instead. The question that rattled about my head was this: what was the point of spending DSLR money on a compact camera? It is one that never really went away and comes to mind when you see the prices of interchangeable lens compacts like Olympus' Pen and equivalent offerings from Panasonic and Ricoh (there, it's interchangeable lens units rather than actual lenses).
The strongest counterpoint to the cost conundrum is the little matter of size. SLR (film or digital) cameras are sizeable things, and there is a place for having something that drops into a pocket. It is that which has propelled me into taking delivery of a Canon PowerShot G11. It may need a good-sized pocket but, unless you are going out with no jacket, it shouldn't be a problem most of the time. For those shorter sorties when I don't fancy bringing an SLR out, it is well-built and looks the business, though some acclimatisation is to make the best of the knobs, buttons and menus. Nevertheless, the included manual will help with this process (there's a paper quick start guide and more detailed documentation on CD).
The camera hasn't seen extensive use just yet, so here are a few early impressions. Firstly, there's the matter of size: it's even smaller than the first camera that I ever bought (more than fifteen years ago) and that was a Ricoh 35 mm compact film camera. That comparison is even more striking when you consider the feature sets. The Ricoh was a fixed 35 mm lens affair with things like date and time stamping, ISO choice and a nod towards scenic mode selection. In contrast, the much newer Canon is loaded with the sorts of things that normally are found almost exclusively on SLR's, starting with its effective 28-140 mm focal length range.
Exposure modes such as manual, aperture priority and shutter priority complement scene-based modes and another for movies (not a concern of mine, it has to be said). As if that weren't enough, there's exposure compensation too. It came as a surprise to me to find a form of manual focussing included, though it is not as convenient as turning a focussing ring on a lens. While you can see the inbuilt flash above, there's also a hot shoe and a place to attach a tripod too. Settings like white balance and file format are accessed using the Function/Set button, with the lever underneath the shutter release button controlling the focal length of the lens. In addition, there's also image stabilisation, and that's important when you're using live view to compose a photo. Spot metering and focal point selection are other things that find their way into the package. Some may be excited by other things, but exposure and focussing are essential for any photographic efforts.
An optical viewfinder is included, and it has diopter settings too, but my first impressions are that live view through the rear screen trumps it and I see no need for such things on SLR's. That also flips out from the camera body and can be rotated either for self-portraiture or for folding back in on the camera body for use like a non-articulated screen. Another use is with those occasions when the subject means holding the camera in positions that would be impossible with a conventional screen; holding the camera over your head or down low on the ground are the sorts of situations that come to mind.
Of course, there's more there than those features that I have listed, and the specifications on the Canon website are as good a place to start as any. So far, my only testing has taken the form of cursory checks and to make sure that the thing works properly. Still, this has given me more of a feel for the camera and how it operates. As you'd expect, high ISO settings are noisy, only for a bigger surprise to be that the smallest aperture setting is f/8. Being used to SLR's, I was expecting to get the likes of f/16 on there, but a spot of internet investigation indicated that I should have been taking the size of the sensor into account with my expectations. Any trials so far have been in dull weather, so I'd need to use it in a wider variety of conditions before giving it the sort of wider appraisal that you'd find in the likes of Outdoor Photography (who liked it, it has to be said). For what it's worth, I have found no major criticism so far, though I cannot see it usurping my SLR's not as if that ever was the intention anyway.
Taking a camera on a walk…
24th July 2007On Saturday, I happened to be in a branch of Jessops only to overhear a salesman emphatically state that you don't buy a camera for its specifications but for the photos that it produces. While his tone of voice was a touch condescending, and he seemed to be putting down a DSLR, he was essentially right. Nevertheless, the specifications do help you get the images, so they have to be seen in that light.
For instance, having on-board sensor cleaning may save you from having either to clean the thing yourself or send the camera away for the professionals to do the needful, a much safer option in my view. And there may be occasions where image stabilisation is very useful, low light wildlife photography for instance. Yes, there are features that I consider surplus to requirements, like live viewing and movie capture, and that is very much due to my buying cameras to make photos. The salesman in question would surely have agreed...
Field Testing in the Lakeland Fells
Sunday saw me head to the Lakeland Fells for some walking and a spot of testing of my new Pentax K10D. The details of the walk itself are not for here but for my hillwalking blog and that is where you will find them. While making my way from Crewe to Windermere, I perused the manual looking particularly for information pertaining to functions that I actually use, I should really have done this beforehand, but distractions meant that I hadn't got around to it. I had to wade through something designed for a new SLR user before I got to what I consider the important stuff. Though this may be a bit irritating, I can understand and accept why they do it this way; we were all new users once, and they are hardly likely to want to know about things like aperture priority, raw file capture, ISO control and such like straight away.
First Impressions of the Pentax K10D
What do I think of it then? Let's start with first impressions. It is definitely smaller than the Canon EOS 10D it accompanies in my possession. That said, it is not too small and there is a decent grip hosting the shutter release button and the camera on/off switch. It also feels well-assembled and reassuringly weighty, an important consideration given that it will see the outdoors a lot. A discussion of the features most relevant to me follows.
Power Management and Response Time
On the subject of switching on and off, the camera is set to go into a sleep mode after a second of inactivity, but it reawakens quickly when needed, the trigger being half-depression of the shutter release button. In fact, the camera does reawaken much faster than my Canon as it happens and where the delay is a constant source of some irritation.
Key Controls and Features
Even if it might sound strange, the on/off switch is also used to activate the depth of field preview, something that no SLR should not have. The location may be unusual, but maybe the designers thought that having shutter release and depth of field preview next to each was a logical way to do it. From a camera operation point of view, there is certainly something to that way of thinking.
Behind the shutter release, you'll find a screen that is a reminder of film SLR's. This conveys information such as battery life, number of exposures remaining on the card and exposure details (aperture & shutter speed).
Display and Menu System
Staying on the subject of screens, the one on the back of the camera is larger than that on the Canon. As is customary for these, it allows replay of photos taken and access to the various menus required to control the camera's operation. In comparison to the Canon, which is essentially a one menu affair with a thumb wheel controlling scrolling and an OK button at its centre to perform operations, the Pentax has a more elaborate system of submenus: one each for recording, playback and set-up.
The playback menu is where I found the setting that makes the camera highlight areas of underexposure and overexposure during image playback. This is something that I missed regarding the Canon until I happened upon it. Camera cleaning is located on the set-up menu, and the camera is now set to clean the sensor every time that it is turned on. Why this is not enabled by default is a little beyond me, but the designers might have thought that a vibration from the camera on turning it on could have resulted in a load of support calls. The same submenu also hosts memory card formatting.
File Format and Navigation Options
The recording submenu is where I set the camera to deliver RAW DNG files, an Adobe innovation, rather than the default JPEG's. There are other options like RAW PEF files, Pentax's own format, or RAW and JPEG simultaneously, but my choice reflects my workflow in Photoshop Elements; I have yet to stop the said software editing the DNG files, however.
With all these options, it is fortunate that there is a navigation wheel whose operation uses arrow buttons to get about. While on the subject of the back screen, there are further settings that are accessed with the FN button rather than the Menu one. These include ISO, white balance, shooting mode (single, continuous, timed and so on) and flash. The only setting that I changed out of this lot was to set the ISO to 400; I prefer to feel that I am in control.
Exposure Modes and Controls
Returning to the camera's top plate, the exposure mode dial is on the left-hand side, which is no hardship to me as this is in the same place as on the Canon. There are no scene modes, but the available exposure modes are more than sufficient: fully automatic, program, sensitivity priority, shutter priority, aperture priority, shutter and aperture priority, manual, bulb and external flash synchronisation.
A few of these need a spot of explaining. Sensitivity priority is a new one on me, but it is a consequence of the ability of DSLR's to offer a range of ISO settings; the aperture and the shutter speed are varied according to the ISO setting. Shutter and aperture priority is like manual exposure and is the inverse of sensitivity priority: set both aperture and shutter speed, and the camera will vary the ISO setting. Both of the foregoing assume that you let the camera set the ISO, but my setting the thing myself may have put paid to these functions.
Shutter priority and aperture priority are, as far as I can tell, their usual selves. For all exposure modes, the thumb wheels at the front and back of the shutter release handgrip set apertures and shutter speeds where appropriate, and this arrangement works well.
Metering Options
The focussing mode selector is found on the left of the body, next to the lens coupling. I am used to having this on the lenses themselves, so this is a new arrangement for me and one to which I can easily become accustomed. In fact, it is easy to find it while composing a picture. The modes themselves are manual focus, one-time autofocus and continuous autofocus; the last of these is for focussing on moving objects.
While I could go further, perhaps overboard, with a discussion of the features of this camera, I draw a line at what's here. Yes, it is useful to set the focussing point and activate image stabilisation, but the above are what matter to me and its performance in the photo making department is the most important aspect.
Performance in the Field
That neatly brings me to my appraisal of how it performs. With inspection of the first few images on the review screen, I was a little disappointed to see how dark the foreground was in comparison to the sky. When I brought everything home, as I always do, I found that things weren't necessarily as they appeared in the field. The Pentax more usefully offers histogram review and highlighting of any areas that are either underexposed or overexposed. It is these functions that I will be using in reshooting decisions while out and about with the Pentax, and the same can be said for how I currently use the Canon.
In fast changing lighting, the AE lock technique was a bit irritating, yet I am certain that I will get better at it. The autofocus doesn't always lock onto the subject, especially in tricky lighting, so manual focussing is a definite necessity and is more useful more for landscape photography, in fact. Nevertheless, the autofocus did do well most of the time, and my Sigma lenses have done worse things on me.
Conclusion
Overall, I'm satisfied with the K10D and plan to continue using it. My recent excursion yielded some quality photographs, which, as the Jessops salesperson would agree, is the ultimate purpose of any camera.
Amateur Photographer reviews…
19th July 2007Amateur Photographer seems to have had a run of reviews recently. First off were the Olympus E-410 and E-510 that they seemed to like. Then, they moved onto the Ricoh Caplio GX100, which they seemed to like that too, though they did say that the quality wasn't up to SLR standards. But then again, it is a compact and that might be expecting a bit too much.
This week, Paint Shop Pro comes under the spotlight, as does Epson's V350 scanner. While I have yet to read these, I have been engaging in a spot of equipment acquisition anyway. My CanoScan 5000F scanner has been usurped by Epson's Perfection Photo 4490 and very happy I am with it too. The quality of the scans that I have been doing of prints has been good, and the presence of an on/off switch is a creditable one. When none of the other scanners that I have had possessed it, having to plug something in and out from the power socket is inconvenient to say the least.
In addition, I have also gone and got myself a new DSLR. Seeing Pentax's K10D going with an 18-55 mm lens for £499 at Jessop's overrode my better reasoning, putting paid to ideas of purchasing any other electronic goods for the rest of this year. It's an award-winning gadget, and Photography Monthly's Will Cheung seemed to get on fine with it. While Which Digital Camera said it was heavy, it has to stand up to use in the great outdoors.
Though the sensor may be a 10 megapixel affair, this will be an upgrade to my Canon EOS 10D; that has a sensor in need of clean right now (I plan to get it done by the professionals) and every time that I want to use an image that it has made, Photoshop's healing brush has to be pressed into service. Pentax does boast about all the seals that it has added to the K10D, a good thing if they cut down on the dust entering the camera. And if dust does get in, the sensor cleaning feature will hopefully see it off from the photos.
Image stabilisation, another value adding feature, is also there and may prove interesting. Strangely, there's some video capture as well, and I hope that it doesn't get the EU coming after me to collect retrospective camcorder duty. In any case, it's not a feature that I really need, with the Live View functions on the equivalent Olympus offerings falling into the same category. It'll be interesting to see how the K10D performs, given that it's a change from the Canon/Nikon hegemony that seems to dominate digital photography these days.
Update: I have since perused the current issue of Amateur Photographer and seen that Paint Shop Pro suffered from performance issues on computers that worked fine with Photoshop. Otherwise, it compared well with Adobe's offerings, even if the interface wasn't seen to be as slick. Epson's V350 was well received, though it was apparent that spending more got you a better scanner; that's always the way with these things.
Another Olympus E-system review
27th June 2007
I don't buy Amateur Photographer much these days, but sight of a review of Olympus' E-410 and E-510 SLR's got a copy into my possession. Amateur Photographer review features are usually comprehensive and this was no exception; there was none of the vitriol directed towards the Live View feature by Practical Photography, a defining feature of what I consider a lop-sided and none too useful review. The verdict was positive in the main, with the E-510 getting the nod over the E-410 because it fared better on the usability side of things. Image quality, my major concern, was said to be impressive with only dynamic range counting against the results. The Live View feature didn't attract the harsh commentary devoted to it by Practical Photography. Following this review, I have to say that the E-510 does tempt me with its combination of good image quality, dust removal and image stabilisation.