Random Excellence

Roark Johnson, Sailor from Great Lakes Naval Base visiting his family from Ohio in Chicago

Roark Johnson's "Stranger A Day 2007."

Great stuff—well worth a look. I hope it's going to continue.

(Just as an aside, this may be one project that might easier to do with a view camera than a digital one. It might be easier to persuade strangers to pose for a big, non-moving, serious-looking camera on a tripod than it would be to enlist their cooperation with a dinky digicam.)

Roark Johnson is a commercial and editorial photographer from Chicago. You can see more of his work at his website, including lots o' shiny happy commercial portraits and a nice series of school kids.

And finally, if you don't already know (I'm apparently one of the last people on Earth to find out about this project), here's a link to the original Stranger A Day.

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON, with thanks to Charlie D. and to Kathryn

The Existential Sandbox

The existential sandbox—perfect thoughts for a Friday morning. (You need to start with the post "Now This Here Is a Sandbox.")

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON

Buying Digital: Too Much Shopping!

by Ctein

I have a bunch of film cameras gathering dust. My standard carry-around camera is a Fujica GA645, a fully automatic medium-format point-and-shoot with manual overrides. I've a Canonet G-III 17 and an Olympus XA with flash that I haven't used in 10 years, and an Olympus Stylus Epic that I haven't used in four. They're not more convenient to use than the GA645 and the negatives are just too small to really make me happy. Why make photos if I don't get pleasure out of them?

So, they're off to eBay, along with some Wallace ExpoDiscs, etc. I'm gonna finally buy a low-end digital camera for its convenience, and researching this is giving me a serious headache. There are too many damn compromises unless one spends lots of money. I'm not going to spend over $400.

Is this the stuff that dreams are made of...or nightmares? The camera may prove to be the former, but buying is definitely the latter.

I'm a color negative, available light photographer. Low image noise in dim light and low contrast in any situation are important to me. I know a cheap digital camera isn't going to have the capture range of even slide film, let alone negative film. So I want either really low image contrast or RAW format. And I'd like some decent degree of sharpness, so that when I make 8x10 prints I don't feel the same way I did with my dinky 35mm negs.

I looked at the Fuji Finepix F30/F31. Fabulous low light performance and sharpness more like a 10 MP camera. But dpreview says daylight photos are very contrasty with clipped highlights and shadows, and no RAW to circumvent that. Forget it!

Next came the Olympus SP-550 UZ. RAW, image stabilization, and a big zoom (size matters). But the lens is lousy; an awfully fuzzy image for 7 MP. Low light quality is poor and there are weird performance issues. Feh.

Third time's the charm...maybe? The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8 looks plausible. Good lens and good sharpness, very good image stabilization and RAW quality, even usable RAW quality at high ISO's. But...

I can't seem to find any review sites that provide "characteristic curves" ("dynamic range," if you prefer) for different cameras. Pretty basic and important info, that. Give me a graph that plots exposure on the x axis and output value on the y axis. Is that too much to ask?

Headaches, really!

Posted by: CTEIN

The Legendary 1839 Susse Frères

On Saturday, May 26th, the Vienna auction house WestLicht will auction what will very likely become the world's most valuable camera. For most of photography's history, the oldest commercially produced cameras were thought to be those manufactured by Daguerre's brother-in-law Alphonse Giroux, of which some ten survive. But behind the Giroux was a mystery: it was known that a sliding-box Daguerreotype camera had been advertised by a Paris firm called Susse Frères a mere ten days before the first announcement of the Giroux. No examples were known, and for many years it was doubted that any had ever existed.

Until, that is, one turned up recently in Germany. The camera to be auctioned by WestLicht is essentially an "attic find." "It was originally owned by Prof. Max Seddig (1877–1963)," reads the auction description, "who was the director of the Institute of Applied Physics in Frankfurt am Main and, among other things, godfather to the founding of the Josef Schneider Optical Works in Kreuznach. Seddig gave the camera to his assistant, Günter Haase, as a present. The latter was later Professor at the Department of Scientific Photography at the University of Frankfurt and, from 1970 on, occupied the Chair for Scientific Photography at the Technical University of Munich. Prof. Günter Haase died on February 20th 2006 at the age of 88 and left the camera to his son, Prof. Wolfgang Haase.

"Numerous experts attest that it is very likely the oldest commercially-produced camera in the world."

Previously, the world's most valuable camera was believed to be the surviving Ur-Leica of Oskar Barnack, owned by Leica AG, of Solms, Germany, although it has never been sold. Opening bid for the legendary Susse Frères will be 100,000 Euros, and the selling price is believed likely to exceed 1 million Euros.

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON, with thanks to Frames, the CameraArts newsletter

Switcheroos

Lloyd Chambers, Eagle on Iceberg from kayak, Alaska’s inside passage, 2002

In a rather shocking turnaround, Lloyd L. Chambers of diglloyd recently announced that the upcoming EOS 1D Mk. III has him convinced. Check out his article "Goodbye Nikon?" As usual, it's an interesting, wide-ranging analysis. Especially interesting is his discussion, in the article, of what he feels is Canon's superior commitment to developing new prime lenses.

This is the most unexpected switcheroo since 2006, when landscape photographer and master dye transfer printer Charlie Cramer switched from his 4x5 Linhof to a $25,000, 39-megapixel PhaseOne medium-format digital back—and zoom lens—that he had tested and found was very close to the quality of the 4x5. Charlie reports that the biggest change in his shooting was that he went from about 500 film exposures per year (at $4 a pop) to 5400!

Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON

Great Minds...

This is kinda cool—compare Anthony Collins' Mona Lisa with the current cover of The New Yorker, which shows a couple chimping a picture of a painting on a tiny digicam while standing in front of the painting.







Posted by: MIKE JOHNSTON

Featured Comment by Hannah:








(Cartoon by Michael Leunig)

Review: Think Tank Rotation 360 Backpack

by Joe Reifer

The most innovative design feature of this backpack is the bottom section is actually a beltpack that can rotate around to allow easy access to your gear without taking off the bag—perfect for quick lens changes. I’ve been testing the Rotation 360 since January, and rotation feature works quite well. Once you’ve tried this bag, you’ll notice how many times you set your regular backpack down in the course of a shoot to access your gear.

Speaking of setting your bag down, the Rotation 360 stands up straight because the bottom of the backpack frame is completely flat. My other backpacks have a propensity to topple over into the dirt, so I really appreciate this feature. The ergonomic carrying handle on the top of the bag is also nicely designed.

Features and ergonomics
The materials and zippers on the Rotation 360 are high quality, and the straps are comfortable and easy to adjust. The placement of the padding that rests against your back is designed for ventilation. The belt strap attaches to the right of center, which keeps the clips from rubbing. I’ve been on multiple 4–5 hour adventures using the Think Tank 360, and it's quite comfortable.

The bag includes a basic camera strap with metal loops that attach to a clip on the backpack's shoulder straps. The clips are easy to connect, height adjustable, and store away neatly when not in use. This innovative strap system really takes the weight off your neck, and also helps comfortably distribute the load by moving some weight to the front.

A standard sized tripod can be carried by putting two legs into a pocket on the outside of the lower backpack compartment and securing it with a strap at the top. For a more balanced load when carrying large tripods there is a hidden fold-down pouch on the bottom of the bag.

How much stuff fits?
The Rotation 360 holds 1–2 camera bodies, 2–3 lenses, flash, and accessories. You can attach additional Think Tank modulus components to the waistbelt for quick access, or to the upper part of the bag. If you normally shoot with a standard zoom but occasionally need quick access to a telephoto, you can mount a lens changer on the belt. Or keep your lenses in the bag and use the space for a Lightning Fast flash pouch, or R U Thirsty water bottle holder. Having a medium sized backpack that’s expandable is a good way to have a lot of flexibility when packing your gear.

Pricing and conclusion
In case you couldn’t tell already, I am a big fan of the Rotation 360—it’s a versatile, thoughtfully designed bag. Innovative design and quality materials do not come cheap. The Rotation 360 retails for $279. There are certainly other camera backpack options in this size range for half the price. The quick access, comfort, and long list of useful design features make the Rotation 360 well worth the price. I’ll be getting rid of a couple of my current bags, and using the Rotation 360 instead. Having one bag you really like means less time spent packing gear, and more time shooting—and that's a worthwhile investment.

To see the Rotation 360 in action, check out the product information including photos and videos.

You can read a longer, more complete version of this review at my website.

Posted by: JOE REIFER