I have been living here in Brisbane for almost 10 years but I have never been to this particular spot under the Story Bridge. I went there this evening for the first time and it was beautiful! The wet “beach” along the river’s edge gave me this lovely reflections of the city lights.
For the past few weeks I have been carrying the NEX6 to work every day. I like how light it is and how it fits my small hands. I am a very tactile person and this is very important for me.
I have already blogged about this camera not long ago. Again, this isn’t a review of this camera. I don’t think you can even buy this camera brand new anymore. It has been discontinued and superceded by the A6000.
Anyway I took the camera for some evening shots on my way home from work. All of the images below were shot handheld and some of them at ISO 6400. Compared to my other 16Mp small camera, the Olympus E-M5, I kinda like how the Oly handles the high ISO grain. Again, proof that it’s not just the size of the sensor that matters but the overall package including in-camera noise reduction and JPEG engine. IMHO, nothing beats Olympus when it comes to JPEG processing. The NEX6 though is also a good performer. I like how it handles JPEG better than my Pentax K5IIs and even my full frame Nikon D700 (the worst of the bunch in my opinion).
Here are some of the shots that I took in a span of one hour within a radius of about 200 meters. These are all completely UNprocessed JPEG shots straight from the camera in full resolution using only the 16-50 collapsible kit lens that came with it. No cropping, no retouching. Just the pure goodness of the NEX6.
In-camera black-and-white conversion looks good as well:
I had to push harder when it turned completely dark. Here are some shots of the casino.
That’s it for now. Next time, I’ll see if I can push it even harder 🙂
Today I decided to photograph the same location but with different elements in the shot just to see how the mood changes from one frame to another. I find it interesting to see how light and human figures affect the feeling of a location. These shots were partly inspired by Joel Meyerowitz’s book “Cape Light”.
This review has long been overdue and I think it may no longer be relevant especially that the E-M5/OM-D has been released. I mean what’s the point of reviewing old technology? Nevertheless, I’ll try to write about this camera in terms of my own experiences.
Just a bit of background about my other cameras. I have a Nikon D700 which I use for portraiture and event photography. I also have a Pentax K5 which I use for landscape and travel. I still shoot film and I absolutely love my Nikon FM3A and FE2 cameras. My iPhone 4G is for almost everything: events, candids, landscape, travel, basically anything that interests me.
So where does the E-P3 fit in considering that my other cameras have got everything covered? It’s the camera that replaces the iPhone when I expect to capture something worth keeping/printing where the DSLRs might seem awkward. So just like my iPhone the E-P3 is for everything.
The E-P3 is the camera I bring to work everyday, to birthday parties, to gigs/concerts, to everywhere. What I like about the camera, and m43 cameras in general, is their size. Big enough sensor to rival the image quality of DSLRs while small enough to carry everywhere without being awkward or intimidating. The camera can literally fit in my jacket’s pocket.
Last night we had dinner in a restaurant and it was very dim; just enough light to set an intimate mood. The E-P3 had no problems capturing the moment at all:
These are all unedited JPEGs shot at ISO 1600 with the kit 17mm/2.8 lens. The in-body stabilization is very effective in allowing me to shoot handheld even at 1/8s. The highlights and shadows are kept at acceptable levels. The grain doesn’t look bad at all. It actually looks like film grain which to me is pleasing. With a better set of lens such as the Panasonic 20mm/1.7, handheld shots should not be a problem in similar conditions. I could have used the pop-up flash but that would totally ruin the mood of the photo. I can’t imagine bringing my Nikon D700 in this occasion.
In good light, the E-P3 is superb. Here’s a shot of Adelaide Street in Brisbane using the plastic 40-150mm kit lens taken during mid day:
I opened the lens to f5.6. Again this is a JPG image processed in Photoshop. I like how smooth the E-P3 handles the highlights while maintaining details in the shadow areas. Some cameras are really bad at handling high contrast situations but the E-P3 managed to capture the scene quite well.
Another shot captured by the plastic 40-150mm lens at full zoom, ISO 800 at f5.6:
Camera in one hand while my other hand was trying to hold my umbrella against gusty winds. My D700 and 70-300mm lens would be almost impossible to use in this situation. Notice how the film-like grain adds character to the shot.
Here’s a different shot taken at dusk on the way home from work:
Here I used a flimsy tripod and captured multiple JPG frames for the stitched panograph. I really wished I had a wider lens. The 17mm (35mm in full frame) wasn’t wide enough even in portrait orientation and my back was already leaning against the wall.
I would say that the E-P3 is capable of handling just about any situation you throw at it.
Other features that I like in the E-P3 are the preset banks (none in my D700), fully customizable AEB (again, better than my D700), black frame subtraction to minimize hot pixels during long exposures, in-body stabilization that works, dust reduction that works and arguably THE best JPEG rendition in the industry. Autofocus with the 17mm kit lens is still hit or miss though but newer lenses are really quick. The kit lenses are really good. I have only used the 17mm, the new 14-42mm and 40-150mm plastic fantastic and they all produce very acceptable images even at their widest apertures.
Why did I choose a micro 43rds camera? I purchased the E-P1 with 17mm kit when it went on sale at 50% off. I gave it to my brother together with the 14-42mm when I won the E-P3 in a proper photography contest (proper meaning my friends didn’t vote for my photo). For me, Olympus’ implementation of the m43 format is the most logical carry everywhere camera that you could buy now. Other “compact” systems don’t make sense to me. The Sony NEX series have gigantic mediocre lenses, the Nikon 1 and Pentax Q really are just glorified point-and-shoot cameras. Of course there’s the Fuji X series but without proper zoom lenses, you could hardly call them walkabout cameras. They are also expensive, huge and have really buggy implementations. The Canon G1X looks really nice but I think it arrived too late. I won’t mind the fixed zoom lens of the G1X because I rarely change lenses even with my DSLRs. When I go out, I usually carry just one camera and one lens and concentrate on taking photographs.
With the release of the E-P3 (and the new E-M5/OM-D) together with superior lenses, Olympus has finally proven to the world that the 43rds format is here to stay. They have managed to build a stronghold in a unique position in the industry. I’m wishing them all the best.
The deeper I become involved in photography, the more I realize that equipment does not matter at all. Case in point, I have more fun photos captured with my iPhone than any of my other cameras combined.
Well actually gear does matter but not like most “photographers” would make you believe. The most important thing about equipment is that it should never get in the way of your creative vision. Also consider the fact that there is no such thing as a perfect tool. There will always be something that would tick you off and knowing the limitations is the first step in making the equipment work for you.
I would like to discuss a particular photograph wherein both the equipment and the photographer (me) were severely limited. The photograph I would like to talk about is this:
A bit of background on this shot: This photo was taken about a month after I started in photography, around May of 2009. My camera back then was a “heavy” Nikon D60 with a 18-55mm kit lens. I wish I brought that camera with me when I took this photo but instead I had my “pocket” Canon G10. Now the G10 is known for very poor low light performance because some moron in Canon engineering thought they could get away with cramming 14 megapixels into such a tiny sensor. At ISO 400 the output is so noisy that you are better off not taking the shot at all. But I did. Because I didn’t know any better. I looked at the EXIF data and it said I shot in auto mode, ISO 400, f2.8 at 1/8s. I am now very familiar with the G10 and I would say that, at that time, the camera was pushing real hard to capture the image as best as it could. It’s at its widest aperture of f2.8 and just enough shutter speed (1/8s) for the real focal length of about 6mm (28mm full frame equiv). If I remember correctly, I didn’t have a tripod. If I did then there’s no reason why I would not have used ISO 100 and get away with half a second exposure. I was a n00b but not completely dumb you know :-p
I don’t remember how I processed the photograph but there must have been some, if not too much, noise reduction applied. I probably didn’t bother correcting the white balance. After all, winter in Canberra is characterized by strong magenta tint in the sky during sunset and I have always wanted to capture that.
I would like to critic my composition as well. I used a combination of strong lead-in lines, rule of thirds in the vertical while using symmetry in the horizontal to capture the reflection. I think I framed it a bit too much to the left thus making the bridge feel like it wants to leave the view. That building visible on the left is nicely framed by the bridge and the shadows on the water. A bit underexposed for my taste but just enough so as not to blow up the highlights coming from the bridge lights that emphasize the lines leading towards the parliament house (that pointed structure at the end of the bridge). I really would like to brighten up the bridge and the building by just a few notches and tone down the bluish color cast. A touch of fill light should also improve the overall exposure without destroying the mood.
After all of that, the question remains: Why discuss this particular rookie shot? Because this rookie shot sold for $852!
So again, it’s never the gear. My expensive DLSRs have not made any significant sales yet but two of my point-and-shoot cameras have already paid up for themselves. Amazing! Granting that photo sales are subject to a huge amount of luck, people or corporations are willing to pay if they think that the photograph is worth it.
They say that the best camera is the one that’s with you. I say, the best camera is the one you can never afford. So make do with what you already have and resist the temptation to buy more gear. A lot of amateurs are getting crazy over the latest and greatest equipment and spend more time in rumours than actual photography. Stop that already.