Compact Companions - Part IV
POTATOES, LAMPBLACK AND TWO TAXI - CABS.
I had hoped to come back to this subject long before now, but other projects and a slow down on the technology front connived to postpone attempts to tackle any remaining issues.
To sum up briefly, it is reasonably clear from reproductions seen in mechanical print to date that derivatives of the compact digital camera models discussed previously, i.e. Ricoh GRII, GX200 and Panasonic LX3 (aka Leica D-Lux 4) are all capable of producing excellent image file quality for repro to a moderate size.
In particular, the LX3 with built in firmware for the correction of lens distortion, chromatic and spherical aberration, does an excellent job, only let down by comparison with the other two, by its weaker ergonomic features. In that department, both Ricoh cameras stand head and shoulders above the rest as well as, the Sigma DP1 which I will come to shortly.
REPRO QUALITY
I have mentioned in a previous post that when my own history of reproductions is analysed, by far the highest number appear on the page at up to half page size - roughly A5 or, as is often the case these days, a lot smaller. The reasons for this are numerous but a general observation often points toward the page layout person having to grapple with the compromise of balancing headlines, standfirsts and text on the page. The latter has to go in, a picture doesn't and if it does, usually its purpose is illustrative rather than because of any artistic merit.
(1) GX200_PIER.
This is the whole frame made with the Ricoh GX200 at ISO 100 in fine Jpeg mode at 10.9mm focal length on the zoom lens.
(2) GX200_DET_1.
Section cropped from the original image (1) upscaled to 18ins (45cms) on the longest side.
(3) GX200_DET_2.
Second section from image (1) at the same dimension as in (2). Neither crop shows any particular fragging or mashing to small details which would show up in repro yet the smallest details are lacking in clarity and sharpness. Noise is plainly visible in the larger areas of single toned hues.
In Sweden last year, I covered a story for one magazine with a Dslr and two lenses, a prime standard and a wide angle. I also carried a Leica film camera fitted with a 50mm standard and took along the Ricoh GRII.
The Leica never got used and the majority of shots required for two four page issues were obtained with the Nikon or the Ricoh. When the first issue appeared in print, it opened with a full page pick-up shot captured underwater with an Olympus compact in a housing. I couldn't really fault the quality for sharpness or contrast, and other than wondering what Hans and Lotte Hass would have made of it all, flipped to the remaining pages. The editor had chosen half page images from the Ricoh while a few files from the Nikon were dropped in as small inserts. A similar approach was used in the follow-up issue; nothing of mine was used larger than half a page and even with a lupe on the stuff from the compact, differentiating between the far higher quality obtained from the Nikon's larger sensor and the diminutive Ricoh sensor was a tough call.
(4) GRD2 VISBY
The whole scene as captured with the Ricoh GRII at ISO 100, focal length fixed 28mm, exposure aperture f/5.6.
(5) GRD2 DET 1.
Cropped section from bottom right of the whole frame enlarged to 18ins (45cms) on the longest side (suitable for A3 repro.).
(6) GRD2 DET 2.
Second cropped section taken from top left of image. There is less apparent noise overall in this image but the window frames and plank seams are beginning to take on the typical mashed appearance of a Jpeg pushed a little too far, though only really noticeable in the lighter parts of the image. The original frames will reproduce very nicely at half a page with a 133-155 screen and will hold together up to 1 1/4 A4 pages. Beyond this, image structure falls apart, leaving little room in the original for cropping unless the crop is to be used small.
Only in a later issue of the same magazine did it become apparent that it was perhaps unwise to supply image files from the Ricoh intended to be used as a double page (A3) spread. At this level of upscaling, an image originally captured in fine Jpeg mode and then cropped by about 30% was pushing things to the limit. From a little more than the normal reading distance (10 inches/ 25 cms), the smallish details in the reproduced image were well mashed; from double this reading distance, the smudge was just about passable, but no where near as clear, sharp or detailed as it really needed to be.
I have since found another way (not new software) to upscale these tiny jpeg image files which brings a slight improvement to the reproduced quality. Also, upscaled RAW files obtained with the LX3 fair rather better than those from the Ricoh and on a much earlier occasion a cropped Jpeg file from an LX2 used across two pages, probably proved beyond any doubt that as good as the Ricoh files are, the Panasonic A/D conversion process is better.
So now, the conundrum for me comes down to ergonomics and in this repsect, both Ricohs win. So much so, that I find the GRII lives on a string around my neck much of the time. I rarely leave base without it.
But, as is often said in the field of some sports, 'it's not over 'til it's over.'.
A ten day assignment in France last year gave me the opportunity to thrash the newly launched Sigma DP1 with its fixed 16.6mm (28mm in 35mm format equivalent.) f/4 lens, and since, I have seen some of the results in print.
The camera uses Sigma's own Foveon X3 CMOS sensor (20.7mmX13.8mm) housed in a device approximately the same size as the Ricoh GRII. The DP1 is a very well made piece of kit with an all metal outer casing. However, users will need some time to adjust to its slinky feel and I cannot say the designer put ergonomics at the top of the list when coming to draw this tool. A pity, as it just needs more pronounced features on one end to improve the hand holding. I also had some minor issues with function controls, but it seems patience is what is really required to set the thing up properly in the first place.
While slotting perfectly in to the 'compact' bracket, the DP1 is really in a different league from the brands mentioned; it is also at a different (higher) price level.
The three layer CMOS sensor is not quite the same size as the APS-C type found in many Dslrs, but it is much larger - 7-12 times - than sensors in the majority of small compact digital cameras, including those already mentioned. In Jpeg mode, the camera produces a file size of approximately 13mb, 14.6 inches on its longest side at a native resolution of 180ppi. The aspect ratio is 3:2 which is a little narrow for my taste compared with the more pleasing proportions of the 4:3 of the Ricoh.
(7) DP1 SD10148 1
The whole scene captured on the Sigma DP1 at ISO 100 and aperture f/5.6 in fine Jpeg mode with fixed 16.6mm (28mm equivalent in 35mm format.) lens producing a different aspect ratio to the Ricoh models (see text.).
(8) DP1 DETAIL 2.
This, like previous crops, is from a section of the original image upscaled to 18ins (45cms) on the longest side. Small details are easily identified with no visible evidence of edge mashing or fragging; large areas of single hued tone are even and clear.
(9) DP1 DETAIL 1.
In this second crop there is very slight evidence of a fall off in sharpness toward the edge of the frame. Using a smaller f/stop would have improved depth of field marginally but this might not be noticed in print. Overall image quality is excellent for a Jpeg file and can be improved further using Sigma's X3F RAW capture mode.
At first glance the file size hardly seems practicable, but upscaling an image in Photoshop to DPS maintains a high quality level of small detail, overall sharpness and smooth tonality across the image. Viewed at 100% on screen, these upscaled images are four times larger than they are likely to appear in print, but apart from almost imperceptible fragging to the edges of some small details, objects maintain a clarity which the smaller compact sensors cannot match. There is no evidence of mashing. Reduced down to their real life size, none of these faults in the DP1 files are visible and noise levels are well controlled at all but the highest sensitivity settings.
This is a camera one needs to get to know well to extract the best it is capable of producing. Operationally, it is not quick, as I found on occasion during my ten day jaunt and I reiterate that more than the usual degree of patience is required at times. Being a lazy so and so, I rarely shoot anything in RAW mode, but since using the DP1 I have been persuaded by the quality of its reproduced Jpeg files - up to 3/4 page - that a still higher quality level can be obtained and for certain stock material which has the potential of advertising use or larger than A3 repro, RAW capture and the extra processing time involved is a necessary evil.
The much larger sensor area of the DP1 has one other effect on the image.
The tiny sensors used in the majority of compact cameras permit the use of extreme wide angle objectives with a short back focal length, i.e. the distance from the rear element of the lens cell to the imaging plane, the sensor in this case. This shorter distance effectively increases depth of field at any given distance setting - the range over which objects in the frame are in apparently sharp focus. It's the reason why it is quite difficult at times to separate the main subject in the motif from the background with small sensor cameras. The DP1's much larger sensor and 28mm equivalent lens combination is manifest in a shorter depth of field characteristic, enabling the user with more control through selective use of aperture setting to capture appropriate out of focus backgrounds when required. The effect produces images which look more as if they might have been made on a medium format film camera, helping to concentrate the viewer's focus on the intended image subject.
(10) DP1 VENDOME 1.
This is the whole frame captured at ISO 100 at aperture f/10 in fine Jpeg mode.
(11) DP1 VENDOME 2.
And this is a 100% crop from a section of the image in (10) enlarged to 24ins (60cms) on the longest side in a straight upscale in Photoshop with no unsharp mask applied. The level of detail retained in the image speaks for itself.
Some observers have complained that Sigma's remit for this camera should have included a faster maximum lens aperture; f/4 being considered slow in comparison to the wider f/2.8 or f/2.4 of lenses in other compacts. Considering the sensor size of the DP1, a larger maximum aperture for the 16.6mm lens would have required a far larger physical size of lens, thus eliminating any prospect of the camera being called a compact. In practice, I didn't find f/4 especially restrictive, but it does mean that if you want to shoot black cats in a coal hole, some form of camera support will probably be necessary to obtain shake free images. The old Leitz table top tripod folds neatly into one of Lowepro's Sideline Shooter bags.
In due course later this year, Sigma plans to launch the DP2, a camera similar in size and features to the DP1 but fitted instead with a 40mm (35mm equivalent.) f/2 lens. To be sure of being covered for most focal length eventualities (aside from the really long stuff.), having both cameras to hand would be necessary. Which brings me in its roundabout way to the title of this piece and its meaning.
Potato starch is what the Lumiere brothers used in the manufacture of their wonderfully subtle Autochrome colour plates back around the turn of the 20th century, the backs of which were coated with lampblack to fill in the gaps between particles of dyed starch. 105 years ago, the process represented state-of-the-art technology for capturing colour images in bulky hand and often tripod mounted wooden cameras. Large scale reproductions from Autochromes were not impossible but in terms of technical quality, the pointillist painter Seurat probably achieved better results.
Then we come to equipment size. The nearest comparison of purpose I can make to Sigma's handy compact-high-image-quality philosophy stretches back to the heyday of the Rolleiflex twin lens reflex. Beautiful but big and bulky medium format film cameras with a choice of fixed standard, wide and telephoto lenses. Carrying all three on any assignment needed muscle as well as a determination to see it through for the sake of quality and the slim chance of a double page spread.
More than two decades past, I was sent on assignment to a little place at the top end of the Baltic Sea to cover a championship yachting event. My camera kit was packed in three cases and included, amongst the several lenses, a 500mm telephoto which alone weighed almost 4 kilos in its box. But this was nothing compared with the kit needed to set up a darkroom in the local paper offices in Lulea for an event that was to last almost three weeks; enlarger, processing tanks, film drying cabinet (!), a mini Durst paper processor, stacks of printing paper, what seemed like a ton of chemicals, laptop computer and printer and two print transmitters. All of this and the two personnel who would use it had to hire two cabs from the local station to the paper on arrival.
Now?
On returning to Sweden last year, everything, except the Nikon and its 80-200 zoom, was crammed into a small shoulder bag; I hand carried the Nikon. Bizarrely, the cab sent to collect me at Visby airport was a stretched limmo Volvo. All that stuff carried to Lulea years before would have fitted in it but sprawled out in the car's cavernous interior, I was really glad I didn't need any of it. Hanging around my neck was a tool smaller than an average cigar pack and weighing about as much. From its image files, repro print quality is better than we ever got from a 10 x 8ins colour print pinged down a piece of copper wire. I'm not waiting for the next generation. The Sigma will do it.
Visitors, users and viewers of the foregoing content may copy and re-use it in other internet content sites on condition the source of all material so used is acknowledged with the attachment of the following.
Copyright; Jonathan Eastland
www.ajaxnetphoto.blogspot.com 2009.
www.ajaxnetphoto.com 2009.
This content may NOT be used in any media made available for commercial resale.
The products and companies named in this website content are trademarks , registered trademarks or servicemarks of their respective owners or licensed user.
I had hoped to come back to this subject long before now, but other projects and a slow down on the technology front connived to postpone attempts to tackle any remaining issues.
To sum up briefly, it is reasonably clear from reproductions seen in mechanical print to date that derivatives of the compact digital camera models discussed previously, i.e. Ricoh GRII, GX200 and Panasonic LX3 (aka Leica D-Lux 4) are all capable of producing excellent image file quality for repro to a moderate size.
In particular, the LX3 with built in firmware for the correction of lens distortion, chromatic and spherical aberration, does an excellent job, only let down by comparison with the other two, by its weaker ergonomic features. In that department, both Ricoh cameras stand head and shoulders above the rest as well as, the Sigma DP1 which I will come to shortly.
REPRO QUALITY
I have mentioned in a previous post that when my own history of reproductions is analysed, by far the highest number appear on the page at up to half page size - roughly A5 or, as is often the case these days, a lot smaller. The reasons for this are numerous but a general observation often points toward the page layout person having to grapple with the compromise of balancing headlines, standfirsts and text on the page. The latter has to go in, a picture doesn't and if it does, usually its purpose is illustrative rather than because of any artistic merit.
(1) GX200_PIER.
This is the whole frame made with the Ricoh GX200 at ISO 100 in fine Jpeg mode at 10.9mm focal length on the zoom lens.
(2) GX200_DET_1.
Section cropped from the original image (1) upscaled to 18ins (45cms) on the longest side.
(3) GX200_DET_2.
Second section from image (1) at the same dimension as in (2). Neither crop shows any particular fragging or mashing to small details which would show up in repro yet the smallest details are lacking in clarity and sharpness. Noise is plainly visible in the larger areas of single toned hues.
In Sweden last year, I covered a story for one magazine with a Dslr and two lenses, a prime standard and a wide angle. I also carried a Leica film camera fitted with a 50mm standard and took along the Ricoh GRII.
The Leica never got used and the majority of shots required for two four page issues were obtained with the Nikon or the Ricoh. When the first issue appeared in print, it opened with a full page pick-up shot captured underwater with an Olympus compact in a housing. I couldn't really fault the quality for sharpness or contrast, and other than wondering what Hans and Lotte Hass would have made of it all, flipped to the remaining pages. The editor had chosen half page images from the Ricoh while a few files from the Nikon were dropped in as small inserts. A similar approach was used in the follow-up issue; nothing of mine was used larger than half a page and even with a lupe on the stuff from the compact, differentiating between the far higher quality obtained from the Nikon's larger sensor and the diminutive Ricoh sensor was a tough call.
(4) GRD2 VISBY
The whole scene as captured with the Ricoh GRII at ISO 100, focal length fixed 28mm, exposure aperture f/5.6.
(5) GRD2 DET 1.
Cropped section from bottom right of the whole frame enlarged to 18ins (45cms) on the longest side (suitable for A3 repro.).
(6) GRD2 DET 2.
Second cropped section taken from top left of image. There is less apparent noise overall in this image but the window frames and plank seams are beginning to take on the typical mashed appearance of a Jpeg pushed a little too far, though only really noticeable in the lighter parts of the image. The original frames will reproduce very nicely at half a page with a 133-155 screen and will hold together up to 1 1/4 A4 pages. Beyond this, image structure falls apart, leaving little room in the original for cropping unless the crop is to be used small.
Only in a later issue of the same magazine did it become apparent that it was perhaps unwise to supply image files from the Ricoh intended to be used as a double page (A3) spread. At this level of upscaling, an image originally captured in fine Jpeg mode and then cropped by about 30% was pushing things to the limit. From a little more than the normal reading distance (10 inches/ 25 cms), the smallish details in the reproduced image were well mashed; from double this reading distance, the smudge was just about passable, but no where near as clear, sharp or detailed as it really needed to be.
I have since found another way (not new software) to upscale these tiny jpeg image files which brings a slight improvement to the reproduced quality. Also, upscaled RAW files obtained with the LX3 fair rather better than those from the Ricoh and on a much earlier occasion a cropped Jpeg file from an LX2 used across two pages, probably proved beyond any doubt that as good as the Ricoh files are, the Panasonic A/D conversion process is better.
So now, the conundrum for me comes down to ergonomics and in this repsect, both Ricohs win. So much so, that I find the GRII lives on a string around my neck much of the time. I rarely leave base without it.
But, as is often said in the field of some sports, 'it's not over 'til it's over.'.
A ten day assignment in France last year gave me the opportunity to thrash the newly launched Sigma DP1 with its fixed 16.6mm (28mm in 35mm format equivalent.) f/4 lens, and since, I have seen some of the results in print.
The camera uses Sigma's own Foveon X3 CMOS sensor (20.7mmX13.8mm) housed in a device approximately the same size as the Ricoh GRII. The DP1 is a very well made piece of kit with an all metal outer casing. However, users will need some time to adjust to its slinky feel and I cannot say the designer put ergonomics at the top of the list when coming to draw this tool. A pity, as it just needs more pronounced features on one end to improve the hand holding. I also had some minor issues with function controls, but it seems patience is what is really required to set the thing up properly in the first place.
While slotting perfectly in to the 'compact' bracket, the DP1 is really in a different league from the brands mentioned; it is also at a different (higher) price level.
The three layer CMOS sensor is not quite the same size as the APS-C type found in many Dslrs, but it is much larger - 7-12 times - than sensors in the majority of small compact digital cameras, including those already mentioned. In Jpeg mode, the camera produces a file size of approximately 13mb, 14.6 inches on its longest side at a native resolution of 180ppi. The aspect ratio is 3:2 which is a little narrow for my taste compared with the more pleasing proportions of the 4:3 of the Ricoh.
(7) DP1 SD10148 1
The whole scene captured on the Sigma DP1 at ISO 100 and aperture f/5.6 in fine Jpeg mode with fixed 16.6mm (28mm equivalent in 35mm format.) lens producing a different aspect ratio to the Ricoh models (see text.).
(8) DP1 DETAIL 2.
This, like previous crops, is from a section of the original image upscaled to 18ins (45cms) on the longest side. Small details are easily identified with no visible evidence of edge mashing or fragging; large areas of single hued tone are even and clear.
(9) DP1 DETAIL 1.
In this second crop there is very slight evidence of a fall off in sharpness toward the edge of the frame. Using a smaller f/stop would have improved depth of field marginally but this might not be noticed in print. Overall image quality is excellent for a Jpeg file and can be improved further using Sigma's X3F RAW capture mode.
At first glance the file size hardly seems practicable, but upscaling an image in Photoshop to DPS maintains a high quality level of small detail, overall sharpness and smooth tonality across the image. Viewed at 100% on screen, these upscaled images are four times larger than they are likely to appear in print, but apart from almost imperceptible fragging to the edges of some small details, objects maintain a clarity which the smaller compact sensors cannot match. There is no evidence of mashing. Reduced down to their real life size, none of these faults in the DP1 files are visible and noise levels are well controlled at all but the highest sensitivity settings.
This is a camera one needs to get to know well to extract the best it is capable of producing. Operationally, it is not quick, as I found on occasion during my ten day jaunt and I reiterate that more than the usual degree of patience is required at times. Being a lazy so and so, I rarely shoot anything in RAW mode, but since using the DP1 I have been persuaded by the quality of its reproduced Jpeg files - up to 3/4 page - that a still higher quality level can be obtained and for certain stock material which has the potential of advertising use or larger than A3 repro, RAW capture and the extra processing time involved is a necessary evil.
The much larger sensor area of the DP1 has one other effect on the image.
The tiny sensors used in the majority of compact cameras permit the use of extreme wide angle objectives with a short back focal length, i.e. the distance from the rear element of the lens cell to the imaging plane, the sensor in this case. This shorter distance effectively increases depth of field at any given distance setting - the range over which objects in the frame are in apparently sharp focus. It's the reason why it is quite difficult at times to separate the main subject in the motif from the background with small sensor cameras. The DP1's much larger sensor and 28mm equivalent lens combination is manifest in a shorter depth of field characteristic, enabling the user with more control through selective use of aperture setting to capture appropriate out of focus backgrounds when required. The effect produces images which look more as if they might have been made on a medium format film camera, helping to concentrate the viewer's focus on the intended image subject.
(10) DP1 VENDOME 1.
This is the whole frame captured at ISO 100 at aperture f/10 in fine Jpeg mode.
(11) DP1 VENDOME 2.
And this is a 100% crop from a section of the image in (10) enlarged to 24ins (60cms) on the longest side in a straight upscale in Photoshop with no unsharp mask applied. The level of detail retained in the image speaks for itself.
Some observers have complained that Sigma's remit for this camera should have included a faster maximum lens aperture; f/4 being considered slow in comparison to the wider f/2.8 or f/2.4 of lenses in other compacts. Considering the sensor size of the DP1, a larger maximum aperture for the 16.6mm lens would have required a far larger physical size of lens, thus eliminating any prospect of the camera being called a compact. In practice, I didn't find f/4 especially restrictive, but it does mean that if you want to shoot black cats in a coal hole, some form of camera support will probably be necessary to obtain shake free images. The old Leitz table top tripod folds neatly into one of Lowepro's Sideline Shooter bags.
In due course later this year, Sigma plans to launch the DP2, a camera similar in size and features to the DP1 but fitted instead with a 40mm (35mm equivalent.) f/2 lens. To be sure of being covered for most focal length eventualities (aside from the really long stuff.), having both cameras to hand would be necessary. Which brings me in its roundabout way to the title of this piece and its meaning.
Potato starch is what the Lumiere brothers used in the manufacture of their wonderfully subtle Autochrome colour plates back around the turn of the 20th century, the backs of which were coated with lampblack to fill in the gaps between particles of dyed starch. 105 years ago, the process represented state-of-the-art technology for capturing colour images in bulky hand and often tripod mounted wooden cameras. Large scale reproductions from Autochromes were not impossible but in terms of technical quality, the pointillist painter Seurat probably achieved better results.
Then we come to equipment size. The nearest comparison of purpose I can make to Sigma's handy compact-high-image-quality philosophy stretches back to the heyday of the Rolleiflex twin lens reflex. Beautiful but big and bulky medium format film cameras with a choice of fixed standard, wide and telephoto lenses. Carrying all three on any assignment needed muscle as well as a determination to see it through for the sake of quality and the slim chance of a double page spread.
More than two decades past, I was sent on assignment to a little place at the top end of the Baltic Sea to cover a championship yachting event. My camera kit was packed in three cases and included, amongst the several lenses, a 500mm telephoto which alone weighed almost 4 kilos in its box. But this was nothing compared with the kit needed to set up a darkroom in the local paper offices in Lulea for an event that was to last almost three weeks; enlarger, processing tanks, film drying cabinet (!), a mini Durst paper processor, stacks of printing paper, what seemed like a ton of chemicals, laptop computer and printer and two print transmitters. All of this and the two personnel who would use it had to hire two cabs from the local station to the paper on arrival.
Now?
On returning to Sweden last year, everything, except the Nikon and its 80-200 zoom, was crammed into a small shoulder bag; I hand carried the Nikon. Bizarrely, the cab sent to collect me at Visby airport was a stretched limmo Volvo. All that stuff carried to Lulea years before would have fitted in it but sprawled out in the car's cavernous interior, I was really glad I didn't need any of it. Hanging around my neck was a tool smaller than an average cigar pack and weighing about as much. From its image files, repro print quality is better than we ever got from a 10 x 8ins colour print pinged down a piece of copper wire. I'm not waiting for the next generation. The Sigma will do it.
Visitors, users and viewers of the foregoing content may copy and re-use it in other internet content sites on condition the source of all material so used is acknowledged with the attachment of the following.
Copyright; Jonathan Eastland
www.ajaxnetphoto.blogspot.com 2009.
www.ajaxnetphoto.com 2009.
This content may NOT be used in any media made available for commercial resale.
The products and companies named in this website content are trademarks , registered trademarks or servicemarks of their respective owners or licensed user.
Labels: Camera, Digital Art, Digital camera, Digital imaging, dslr, Leica, Lens, Nikon, Panasonic, Photographer, Photography, Ricoh, Rolleiflex, Sigma
posted by AjaxNetPhoto at 31.5.09
0 comments
