Despite my tenacious cold, I bundled up and walked around the block this morning to take the new Canon 5D2 and some new lenses for a spin. The fresh snow caking Ouray and the surrounding mountains made for a nice test subject!

The photo above was taken with a Contax/Zeiss 35-70mm lens, at 35mm f/8. This is an old, discontinued, manual focus and manual aperature lens, but I had read many glowing reviews about its incredible sharpness. Supposedly this zoom lens is as sharp or sharper than equivalent length prime lenses! So I picked one up on ebay for a reasonable price and this morning was my first trial run with it. I eagerly opened the files on my computer, and was not disappointed! The sharpness almost looks like it came from a Foveon sensor, but at a much larger resolution. In fact I’m so stoked I thought I’d share the fullsize file with all you pixel-peeping camera geeks out there.

>> Click here to see the sample full resolution file (7.6mb). The raw file had a sharpness setting of 3 (of 10), which does snap it up a little bit, but I figured since that’s about what I’d do anyways with my files, you might as well see it at that setting. The file was converted from 16bit to 8bit, I tinkered with the levels and color balance in Photoshop, added the watermark, and saved it as a quality 10 jpeg (to save a little bandwidth).

Anyhow, I am way stoked on the sharpness I’m getting from the 5D2, the 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses, and now this Contax/Zeiss 35-70mm lens. I can’t wait to get out into the mountains again for some more real shooting with this setup! I’ve got to kick this pesky cold first though.

Last week I went for it, and bought a new Sony A900 full-frame 24mp digital SLR, along with the Zeiss 24-70mm and Sony 20mm lenses. After just a few shoots with the new camera, I’ve gotten cold feet and have returned it. I’ll explain why below. (Warning: don’t bother reading further if you’re not a camera gearhead).

My main reasoning for buying the A900 was that it would be a good compromise between an ultra lightweight small-sensor digital SLR setup (like my 4 lb. Olympus E-420 setup) and a heavy, large format setup (like my 20 lb. 4×5 field camera setup). I was thinking that the 24mp A900 with sharp lenses could potentially provide enough resolution to make prints up to around 50″ wide, from a camera setup weighing in at around 10 lbs, or half the weight of the 4×5 setup. (By the way, the Canon 5DII is the other option here, but this is irrelevant to my point, since the specs are so similar).

My first real shoot with the A900 was a bad wake up call, and the beginning of my “cold feet”. As I mentioned in that post, I just didn’t get along well with the camera interface, finding it to be frustratingly unintuitive. This was disappointing, because I really wanted to love this camera. I know that given enough time, you can get used to and comfortable with most any camera, but for the first time the thought popped into my head that maybe this was not the camera for me afterall.

That night as I was reviewing the photos, I decided to open up some 4×5 drum scans to compare. That’s when it struck me that the A900 is nowhere even close to the 4×5 in terms of image quality and resolution. Not even the same ballpark. Whereas the A900 files could indeed be upsized to a max size of around 50″ wide, this was pushing it, with some fancy sharpening techniques. Compare that to the 4×5 drum scans, which have a native resolution of about 50″ wide @ 300ppi, and can handle upsizing to 120″ wide. Plus, these comparisons don’t even take into account the full-frame SLR’s depth-of-field limitations from not having lens movements… meaning that it would be very tough to have perfectly sharp foreground and background, and any softness would be all the more apparent in the larger print sizes.

That got me to rethink my whole compromise strategy. With weight and image quality being my top concerns, I figure there’s an easy way to sort this all out and boil it down to a simple formula: a basic ratio of resolution/weight. If you compare it this way, the Sony A900 has a lower score than both the Olympus and the 4×5.

Also, for all the supposed benefits of full-frame sensors, I realized two subtle but important limitations, compared to smaller sensors. The first is the increased difficulty of obtaining enough depth of field, as explained here. Secondly, stitching photos together to make really large panoramas becomes more difficult with a full-frame sensor because of increased likelihood of vignetting at the sides of the images. Concerning these two issues, the 2x cropped sensor of the Olympus camera behaves much better.

Perhaps I am being overly analytical about this. But if I was going from my gut the conclusion is the same. I didn’t like the A900 interface, I never liked the 3:2 image ratio, and if I spend $5000 on a new camera I’d better be very stoked on it, and I wasn’t. Perhaps I haven’t given it enough of a chance, but I just had too many doubts, and I had to make a decision before my return period had expired.

I was excited about returning exclusively to digital shooting, but I realize now that there’s really no SLR substitute to the 4×5 field camera, and if I do shoot an SLR, it might as well be a really lightweight one.

So, what next?

I’ll be sticking with my current strategy of taking the 4×5 only on shorter backpacking trips where I’m camped out in one place for several days. For longer, more demanding treks, I’ll be taking a lightweight digital SLR setup, and currently Olympus is where it’s at.

I’m excited about the recently announced Olympus E-620, which is about the same small size and weight as the E-420, but with 12mp and a fuller feature set. The highly regarded Oly Zuiko 7-14mm lens would be a nice addition too, alongside my Oly Zuiko 12-60mm which is still my favorite lens I’ve ever used. I’m also very much interested in the upcoming Olympus micro-4/3 camera, which could potentially have an extremely high image-quality/weight ratio. It might be a while though before that camera is released, along with a set of suitable lens options.

One final note: This post obviously puts the Sony A900 or any full-frame camera in a negative light. Please keep in mind that there are a lot of great things about these cameras (such as the incredible viewfinder, for instance), but I didn’t mention any of this. After all this post is inherently a negative one, all about why I chose NOT to keep this camera. But for the purely digital photographer the A900 might be one of the best cameras ever made. Yes, this could be the perfect camera for someone, but not for me. How’s that for a good break-up line?

Dominate the landscape! Neutralize the elements! Humiliate your surroundings!

This is what it’s like to go backpacking with large format camera gear. Ha! (Thanks for the tip, Wally).

Yesterday a sparkling new Sony A900 24mp SLR camera arrived via Fedex, with a few lenses, so today I figured I’d go take it for a spin. What better place to go on a cloudy day than the Ouray Ice Park, just a few blocks from my house? See a few more photos below.

I spent a fortune on this digital setup, and I have high hopes. During the last year I’ve lost my enthusiasm for lugging around 20+ pounds of large format 4×5 gear and film, and I’ve been spoiled by the light weight and ease-of-use of the little Olympus E-420 digital SLR setup. With the recent generation of high megapixel SLRs, like the Sony A900, a new option emerges that could possibly be the ideal compromise of weight and image quality. Combined with the ultra-sharp 24-70mm Zeiss lens, the 24mp images are very impressive indeed, and in fact from what I’ve seen so far, I’d say that detailed 50″ prints are certainly in the realm of possibilities. Though this is a hefty camera compared to the Oly, requiring a heavier tripod also, the whole setup is still less than half the weight and bulk of the 4×5 system. I plan on adding a more in depth review of the camera here after I’ve had more experience with it.

[+]

You may have noticed that I haven’t been posting much recently. Indeed, I haven’t been DOING much recently, except sitting at the computer day and night for over a week straight, building websites. But it’s been good, because the weather has been so disturbingly warm and spring-like for the last few weeks that the snowboarding hasn’t been too tempting. So I’ve gotten a lot of work done, finished a couple long overdue websites, and am finally caught up and on schedule again. I still have some very busy months ahead of me, with over 10 websites queued up already. Nevertheless, I’ve been realistic with my scheduling, so I will be able to get out more regularly for some backpacking and photography again. And hopefully some more snowboarding if it ever snows again…

The last month has been so warm it is worrisome. Sure the warmth is nice… in APRIL!!! Wearing t-shirts in Ouray in February is not nice, it is disconcerting, especially when it’s like this for weeks on end. We can only hope that this is just Colorado weather wackiness, and not a deeper problem with global warming. Meanwhile, the snowpack is turning to mush, and the ice in the ice park looked positively soggy today. WINTER, WHERE ARE YOU? COME BACK!

View Quicktime Video – 11mb

This weekend I had my first chance to test out my new helmet cam, the GoPro Helmet Hero. It’s a tiny little digital camera with a 170º fisheye lens enclosed in a waterproof casing, which mounts on top of my snowboard helmet.

The video I’ve posted here is just a mellow cruiser run that we lapped a few times… nothing too spectacular but heaps of fun nonetheless. It was mellow enough that we opted for the “Chinese Downhill” strategy of going all at once, and I went last hoping to get some of my friends on camera in front of me. I’m looking forward to filming some of the more intense lines we normally do around here.

More initial thoughts about this helmet cam below.

As you can probably tell by watching the video, I’m a total rookie at working with video files. The camera outputs AVI files, which I imported into iMovie, trimmed the beginning and end, added fade in/out transitions, and exported as a MPEG-4 Quicktime video. If anybody out there is well versed in processing and outputting video for the web, I’d love to hear any tips you can offer.

Since I’ve never used this helmet cam before, and there’s no playback screen on the camera itself, I just had to guess the angle to set it at. Considering the 170º fisheye view, I decided to point it at roughly a 45º angle, thinking that it would capture the tip of my board, to the horizon. I think I guessed pretty good, and that is basically the result I got.

As for the video results, there are obviously a few issues. The biggest problem I see is the random flickering of brightness. I think this is because the camera has a feature that tries to constantly adjust exposure on the fly, and it’s going a little haywire. I may try turning that off, if I can. Secondly, the video seems a bit underexposed generally. I tried brightening it up in iMovie, but that caused some wacky color artifacts, so I just left it as is. Finally, the sound is too quiet, due to the fact that the camera is completely enclosed in the waterproof casing. I tried pumping the sound up 150% in iMovie, but it’s not enough.

Anyhow, although the video quality is not the best ever, it does the job fine. I’m a photographer, not a cinematographer, and unlike still photos where image quality is paramount, these videos are simply good enough to post on my blog, which is just about all I intend to do with these anyways.

I hope to post more videos soon. Again, if anybody has tips or suggestions on how to process the videos better, or post the videos on my site better, please let me know!

Canon just announced the full-frame 21 megapixel 5DII. There’s some grumbling about whether Canon’s lenses can provide the resolution for that many pixels, but either way it’s sure to be an impressive sensor in a relatively small camera. The first 5D has been a standard camera for many landscape photographers, so I’m sure the 5DII will sell like hotcakes, and will be the next “standard” of comparison.

Nikon’s D700 is a 12mp full-frame camera that offers astonishing light sensitivity up to ISO 6400, or a boosted ISO 25600. Another major selling point of a Nikon full-frame camera is the availability of the already renowned 14-24mm Nikon wideangle lens which is supposedly incredibly sharp. As I am a sucker for quality lenses, I’m honestly tempted to invest a serious chunk of change into this system, but I will probably wait until Nikon releases a higher megapixel camera body. This seems likely, not only to answer Canon’s latest release, but also because Sony has announced its impressive 24mp A900, and it’s rumored that Sony and Nikon share sensor technology.

While both the Canon and Nikon offerings are very tempting, they both have a 3:2 image aspect ratio, which, as I’ve ranted about before on this blog, I really really do not like. I wish these cameras would have a 4:3 ratio crop option, even if it was just a simple viewfinder viewing adjustment with corresponding image crop. This seems like it would be a simple feature, and it would be a huge selling point for stubborn photographers such as myself.

Meanwhile, as Canon, Nikon, and Sony duke it out in the full-frame/high-megapixel/high-ISO arena, Olympus and Panasonic are quietly headed in their own direction with their 4/3 and micro-4/3 mounts, developing the smallest and lightest SLR cameras and lenses on the planet. Panasonic just announced their revolutionary Lumix G1, which eliminates the bulky mirror box and prism of traditional SLR optical viewfinders, instead utilizing new LCOS technology for an electronic viewfinder of supposedly comparable viewing quality. Also with smaller sensor and mount, the lenses will be much smaller than traditional SLR lenses. While the G1 is not as radically small as I would have hoped for (it’s the same weight as my Oly E-420), there is still hope that Olympus’s model will be significantly smaller and lighter. (UPDATE: It WILL be smaller and lighter. See prototype pictures here. Now let’s just hope that it still functions like a quality SLR, not a dumbed down consumer point and shoot).

Since the moment I started using the Olympus E-420 this summer, I’ve been spoiled by its light weight and compact size. I’ve been able to go on longer backpack trips, and am able to enjoy the hiking itself much more, instead of huffing and puffing like a mule (which I still do on shorter trips with my 4×5 large format setup). Consider that the E-420 + 12-60mm + 70-300mm lenses equals a total weight shy of 3.5 pounds! And that gives me an enormous 35-mm-equivalent range of 24-600mm! Granted the ISO and resolution won’t quite compare with the full-frame cameras, but for a photographer like me who spends more time hiking than shooting, this weight advantage is a major benefit, and simply adds to the joy of spending time in the mountains (which after all, is what it’s really all about for me).

The dilemma for me, as always, is weight vs. pixels/print size. I can make detailed 30″ prints with my little lightweight Olympus setup. A similar high-end Canon, Nikon, or Sony setup would weigh easily twice as much, but would probably allow for prints up to (I’m guessing) around 45″ wide.

Anyways, at this point, the verdict for me is to stick with my lightweight Olympus setup for the time being, and see what happens with a possible high-megapixel Nikon or Sony camera, and/or a possible super-lightweight Olympus micro-4/3 camera. At that point the spectrum of weight vs. pixels will be stretched out enough that a decision one way or the other will be more clear. Or even more difficult. Either way, options are a good thing, and nowadays photographers have better options than ever before.

With no other viable alternative on the market to fulfill my Quest, my main goal shifted to obtaining a lightweight do-it-all camera setup for my longer backpacking trips when I leave the 4×5 setup at home. The solution was the Olympus E-420, currently the lightest and smallest digital SLR on the market. I didn’t buy the regular kit lenses for this camera; instead I opted for the more expensive but very high quality 12-60mm Olympus lens. I consider this lens to be integral to this camera setup, and as you read my review you must remember that I am reviewing this lens as much as the camera itself.

Read the details of my experience and comparison of both cameras below.

Goodbye Sigma DP1

Here are my perceived drawbacks of the Sigma DP1:

1) Fixed-length wideangle lens that wasn’t quite wide enough for me. The fixed length 28mm-equivalent lens turned out to be simply too limiting for me; many times I wished I had a wider or longer lens to use. (The exception to this was with skiing and snowboarding shots, when I loved this length – more on this below). When I am out shooting photos in the mountains, there is nothing more frustrating than not having a wide enough lens to shoot basic mountain scenes.

2) No macro capabilities. With it’s lengthy minimum focus distance, there’s no chance for close-up shots at all. Some users seem to have had decent results using various macro filter attachments; I tried using a B+W 10+ macro lens, but wasn’t much impressed with the results. An equally important consequence of the lack of close focusing is the fact that even with wideangle compositions, you can’t place foreground elements very close to the camera.

3) Generally slow and compact-camera-style operations. My expectation with this camera would be that it would have all the quick controls and functionality as a dSLR, but in a tiny package. Turns out it certainly delivered dSLR image quality, but the controls felt more like the subpar controls of any other compact. A bit disappointing.

4) The 3:2 image aspect ratio. Although this is the common image ratio with most dSLRs, I absolutely despise it. To my eye it feels like a half-assed panorama for horizontal shots, or much too narrow and lanky for vertical shots. I much prefer the squarer formats of 4:3 or 5:4. Theoretically I could simply crop all my 3:2 photos to those squarer ratios, but in practice I have a strong impulse to fill the entire frame with my composition, so usually cropping isn’t really an option. Plus, cropping is inherently a waste of precious pixels.

With the DP1′s limited lens capabilities as mentioned above, the camera was not a great supplement to my 4×5 set. Nor would it qualify as an only camera on my backpacking trips. The one niche that the DP1 filled excellently for me was to use it for skiing/snowboarding shots in the backcountry. The light weight and compact size, along with the fixed wideangle and the 3 frame burst feature were perfect for this type of adventure/action shooting. When I’m snowboarding, I am focussed more on my own riding than the photography, and being limited to the fixed wideangle length was actually very helpful because I instinctively knew where I had to stop to get the kind of shots I wanted – I knew where I’d have to be in relation to the skier and the background terrain. I feel like this camera really improved my skiing/snowboarding photos this last season.

Despite my love of this camera for skiing/snowboarding shots, and because of its high price, I decided to sell it on eBay. I will surely miss it next winter, and am not sure what I will do to replace it.

Hello Olympus E-420, with 12-60mm lens

This camera combination certainly doesn’t qualify as a compact camera, but along with a small Gitzo GT0530 carbon fiber tripod, the entire package weighs a mere 4-5 pounds – a significant weight savings compared to the 20-25 pounds of my 4×5 large format setup.

Here are the advantages of the Olympus E-420 with 12-60mm lens, as compared to the Sigma DP1:

1) The flexibility of a 24-120mm equivalent zoom range. The difference between a 24mm vs 28mm wideangle is very significant, often meaning the difference between being able to fit a mountain into the frame or not. It is also very liberating to have a zoom range going out to 120mm-equivalent. This zoom range in fact offers what I consider to be the perfect range for about 95% of my landscape photography needs.

2) Awesome macro capabilities. The 12-60mm lens offers great close-up focussing capabilities, opening up a whole world of shooting possibilities.

3) 4:3 image aspect ratio. Olympus, along with Panasonic, are the only cameras to offer 4:3 aspect ratio sensors in SLRs. I love it.

4) SLR speed and control. At this point I’m comparing apples to oranges, but there’s a world of difference with the level of control of a dSLR over all aspects of shooting.

Obviously the E-420 is not a compact like the DP1, and thus has a severe weight and size disadvantage. For snowboarding this is a big problem and I’m not sure if I will want to carry it with me – I think it’s bulky enough to interfere with aggressive riding.

However, the extra size and weight is not much of a problem for me when backpacking, as I can still carry it easily in a chest pouch. In fact, this camera/lens combo has been a real joy to shoot on my recent backpacking trips, allowing me to go lighter, farther, and faster than I ever could with my 4×5 setup, with more ease and flexibility while shooting. While other dSLRs I’ve owned in the past have evoked an intangible revulsion in me, I liked this one right off the bat and have really enjoyed shooting with it.

Conclusion and Ideas for the Future

It is quite unfair to even compare these two, as they are two utterly different cameras. But the similarity, and reason for the comparison, is the basic goal of having a high-quality, lightweight camera setup, and these two cameras are the leading contenders for this – one coming from the compact camera camp, and one coming from the dSLR camp. As a stand-alone, do-it-all camera, the Olympus E-420/12-60mm absolutely blows the Sigma DP1 out of the water, despite its larger size.

I wish I was wealthy enough to keep both cameras and just use the DP1 while snowboarding, but in the end I felt that the DP1 had too high of a price tag to justify this niche usage for me. Perhaps I’ll buy another one someday if/when the price drops substantially.

In an ideal photography world, I would lust after an Olympus E-420 that has a Foveon sensor in it. That is to say, a same-size, pixel-equivalent sensor that is a Foveon instead of a Bayer sensor, which would produce insanely high resolution images.

One exciting recent development is Olympus’s announcement of their upcoming “Micro Four Thirds” lens mount, which theoretically will enable them to produce even more compact SLRs and lenses. I am hoping that their target market with these will be the serious/professional photographer who wants top-notch quality and performance in an ever smaller and lighter package. Perhaps then my Quest for the Ultimate Compact Camera would be complete!

Because of the demands of backpacking, any good backcountry book needs to meet certain physical criteria. It must be compact and lightweight – so it must be a paperback, ideally with small condensed print. I had a brilliant idea once of publishing little “backpacker” editions of books, on thin Bible paper with really small print and perhaps a little companion dry bag. But for now, regular thin paperbacks will do.

Subject matter is also important to consider. Novels can be a poor choice because of the danger of ripping through the story too fast. You don’t want to haul around a book for five days if you’ll only get to enjoy it for one or two. Some novels can also seem like a petty distraction compared to the magnificence of nature around you. If I wanted petty distractions, I’d stay at home and browse YouTube.

I also try to avoid bringing books that have a singular disturbing topic; Under the Banner of Heaven by Jon Krakauer is good example of this. Interesting book for sure, but the last thing I want to do for five days in the mountains is immerse myself in the world of fundamentalist Mormonism.

In my opinion, the best backpacking books are non-fiction, in particular philosophy or spirituality related books. The subject matter can be every bit as profound as your surroundings, perhaps even leading to a deeper connection with the surrounding landscapes. Philosophical books demand closer concentration and slower, more deliberate reading than novels. One chapter can often provide enough food-for-thought to digest all day long, and being out in the wilderness provides the time and focus to do so. These books can also withstand multiple reads; sometimes you can even get more out of it the second time through.

So far, my favorite book for backpacking has been The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are by Alan Watts. What makes this book so perfect for backpacking is that its main theme is about “the illusion that the self is a separate ego, housed in a bag of skin, which confronts a universe of physical objects which are alien and stupid.” Watts explains a different point of view in which we as conscious beings are inseparably intertwined with everything else; that we and the world around us are truly one and the same entity. The ideas in this book provide a perfect compliment to the experience of walking through the wilderness. I’ve already read this book twice over the years, and will likely bring it along on another trip for a third read.

If you have any other suggestions for good backpacking books, please leave a comment here.

For the most part compact cameras are built as point-and-shoot cameras for regular day to day snapshots; however, recently some camera manufacturers have been developing compact cameras that have features geared towards more serious photographers. The appeal of compact cameras is of course that they are compact and lightweight, and if they could be developed to include advanced features along with professional image quality, the result would be a very useful photographic tool indeed.

Over the last several years I’ve been searching, and waiting, for the ultimate compact digital camera. As you may know, my primary camera is a 4×5 large format film camera. Almost all of my serious fine print photos and are made with this beast, but I also like to carry along a supplemental digital compact camera for quick snapshots, action shots, and sometimes macro shots. When I’m backpacking, all my 4×5 gear is packed up in my backpack, but the compact camera fits in a little case on my chest strap – easily accessible for quick shots while hiking.

I am now using my third digital compact camera in as many years, and I will briefly review each one in this article. The sample photos have been processed in Photoshop – they are not direct from camera. Though I may have adjusted brightness/colors/contrast to a minimal degree, I have not done any sharpening or chromatic aberration fixes. The fullsize jpeg images have been optimized for the web, so there might be slight compression artifacts, but it should be negligable.

I’ll also take this opportunity to state that I have little interest in shooting SLRs anymore, even though there are some pretty small ones on the market. First of all, they won’t work as a supplement to my 4×5 system; it’s just too much extra bulk and weight. Secondly, as a standalone system, the weight savings of a complete, quality SLR setup vs. the 4×5 setup is not very significant, yet the image quality difference is huge. If I ever go back to a solely digital setup, it will only be for a lightweight compact camera. In other words, if I’m ever going to sacrifice the awesome image quality of the 4×5 setup, then there had better be a proportional weight savings involved.

On to the reviews!

FUJIFILM F30

This little camera recieved great reviews, and was well known for its superior high(er) ISO capabilities compared to all other compacts. This is a point-and-shoot in the best sense of the phrase; very easy to use, and the images look great right out of the camera, with nice bright saturated colors. Closeup photos from the F30 look really good, with rich colors and smooth tonality. However, the camera has a little more trouble with broad landscape shots, where purple/yellow fringing can become a big problem. The F30 images look nice and detailed at their native resolutions, but for some reason the images do not enlarge very well; I think this has something to do with the SuperCCD pixel configuration but I’m not sure. Regardless of the cause, the details of the images have a sort of jaggedy resolution characteristic that does not respond well to upsizing.

This is a great point-and-shoot which I would highly recommend to the average snapshooter, especially for someone who does not want to have to work on their images in Photoshop. I have made nice detailed prints from the F30 at sizes up to 12″ x 16″.

Sample photos from the Fujifilm F30. Click to view fullsize versions.

RICOH GX100

This camera is a gem, from a relatively unknown camera company. I must say this is my favorite digital camera I’ve ever used. I get the sense that the camera makers put a lot of thought into this one. The big plusses are its wideangle zoom lens, incredible macro capabilities, full manual controls, RAW dng files, and the overall excellent user interface. The big minus is its sensor (more on this in a second).

First the lens: it has a zoom range that is very similar to the range of lenses I have for my 4×5 camera, which is handy for testing/planning potential compositions for my 4×5. The wideangle is nice and wide, probably one of the widest available on any compact camera. The lens is sharp throughout it’s entire zoom range, with very low distortion.

The macro capabilities are insane, and a big reason why I will probably keep this camera for a long time. You can focus within one centimeter! I’ve never really gotten into macro photography before, so having this capability has really expanded my idea of what’s possible with photography. While it’s not quite a true macro in the sense of a professional dedicated macro SLR lens, it offers something a little different. Since you can focus so close to the subject, you can get really unique compositions with a sense of foreground and background on the macro scale. Very cool, and loads of fun.

The universal dng RAW file output is another example of how Ricoh has really thought things through. This camera is targeted for more serious photographers, who appreciate having the superior RAW file capability, along with full manual controls. I like shooting aperature-priority and I can do this with the GX100. I can also put it on full manual, with manual focussing set to infinity, for long evening or night exposures.

The excellent user interface is something that’s hard to explain; you just have to use this camera to appreciate how well thought out it is. For instance I can program two different custom camera setting spaces, which are on the control dial (along with the usual M-manual, A-aperture priority, or P-automatic settings). So I have one setting set for shooting RAW, and one set for shooting JPEG. I can quickly switch between the two settings by simply rotating the control dial, without having to go into the camera settings menu. Very very useful.

For all the huge pluses this camera offers, there is the one major drawback: the sensor and therefore the image quality. This camera has a 10mp compact sensor, meaning that those 10 megapixels are crammed into a tiny space, which inevitably leads to noise artifacts. This a common problem with all high megapixel compacts, and you can find plenty of exhausting articles on the topic online. Anyhow, this sensor (and its excellent lens) certainly delivers sharp, high resolution images that you would expect from a 10mp camera; however along with it comes a whole lot of noise – which ends up looking like old-school film grain on the images. Some people actally like this grainy quality, but as a large-format photographer, I prefer my silky smooth colors. Related to this issue is the sensor’s troubles with high ISO shooting (can’t really do it) and therefore it has a hard time in high-dynamic-range lighting situations such as sunrise/sunsets.

I’ve made some beautiful prints up to 18″ x 24″ from this camera. But because of the noise issues, it can’t be relied upon as a do-it-all camera. If the GX100 had a better sensor it could be the best compact camera ever made. But, just the macro capabilities alone are worth bringing this camera along.

Sample photos from the Richoh GX100. Click to view fullsize versions.

SIGMA DP1

Updated: 4/10/08

This long awaited camera is the first and only compact camera with an SLR-sized sensor inside of it (APS-C sized, or about 12x the size of most compacts’ sensors). Sigma is the only company to yet attempt this, and because of the engineering difficulties involved it took several years for the little DP1 to actually hit the market. Of course I couldn’t resist buying one as soon as possible. I’ve only had this camera for a couple weeks, and have only used it in wintery settings, so my experience with it is admittedly not well-rounded yet. I’ll update this section later, or perhaps add a separate review at some point.

In contrast to the Ricoh GX100, this camera’s weaknesses are its limited features (no zoom lens, no macro, quirky interface), while its stongpoint is its incredible image quality.

The DP1 utilizes the evolutionary Foveon sensor. This is a fundamentally different style of sensor than the traditional Bayer type sensors found in just about all other cameras. You can read up on the Foveon technology here. The bottom line from a users perspective is that when you view the images on the computer at 100%, the detail is tack sharp. (Every other digital sensor out there shows slight blurriness when the images are viewed at 100%, and are tack sharp only when the images are viewed at 50% or 66% size.) Also, the images from the DP1 enlarge extremely well, and I believe I will be able to produce excellent 20″ x 30″ prints from them. Indeed, I am very much impressed with the image quality, which is definitely in a whole different league alongside professional dSLRs.

Another big plus with the Foveon sensor is that it seems to handle highlights very well, at least compared to the other compacts. When processing RAW files, you can pull back the exposure to restore what initially appear to be blown highlights, so it’s pretty forgiving with overexposure.

The DP1 has a fixed length wideangle lens (no zoom). It’s not as wide as the lens on the Ricoh GX100; I wish it were a little wider, but I think it will work ok for me. I’m already used to using prime lenses with my 4×5, so I should be able to adapt to this one pretty quickly. It’s got the traditional SLR 2×3 image aspect ratio, which is a bummer in my opinion; I prefer the squarer formats of 4×5 or 3×4. But, not a big deal.

The DP1 has some quirks and limitations. First off is the already notorious “green corners” issue, where some images have a magenta cast in the center, and a green cast around the corners. Oddly enough, this effect is most apparent when shooting with AUTO white balance; using other preset white balance settings reduces the effect, but still not completely. (UPDATE: Sigma is releasing a new firmware version that will supposedly resolve this issue). Secondly, I’ve noticed that I have to jack up the exposure compensation to get nice bright images with the histogram towards the right. Third: the DP1 can shoot a speedy 3-frame continuous burst; however, disappointingly, you have to shoot all three in one burst – you can’t shoot one, wait just a second, another, etc. Fourth: although the camera has a really nice manual focus dial with live LCD zoom-in feature to check focus detail, you can only focus on the center spot, which is not necessarily where you always want to focus. It would be much nicer (if not expected) to be able to choose from about five or so different focus points, like you can with SLRs. And finally, there’s no macro capabilities, which is no surprise but it would be nice.

As far as reviews go (including mine), the DP1 finds itself in an awkward position because its remarkable image quality inevitably leads to comparisons with quality dSLRs, which are stiff competition indeed. While it’s certainly fair to compare image quality with dSLRs, the DP1 is a COMPACT, so don’t expect it to perform as responsively as an SLR. The fact that this camera is even being compared to dSLRs at all shows what a giant leap forward it is from other compact cameras.

With the promise of professional image quality in a compact camera comes the tempting possibility of leaving the 4×5 at home for some long-distance lightweight backpacking treks. I’ve already been kicking around some ideas for some 75-100 mile treks this summer. I will certainly keep shooting the 4×5 on normal backpacking trips, but I am excited to broaden my backpacking experiences. For the last four years or so, my backpacking has been largely centered around photography, and I have the urge to get back to the roots with more journey-based treks. This little camera may enable me to do this!

Sample photos from the Sigma DP1. Click to view fullsize versions.

CONCLUSION

The Sigma DP1 is still not the ideal compact camera, but it is a groundbreaking camera that has finally brought the fuzzy dream of a professional compact camera into the realm of real possiblities. Hopefully the success of this camera will inspire other camera makers to follow Sigma’s lead. In my opinion, the perfect compact camera would be a Ricoh GX100 with a Sigma/Foveon sensor inside of it. Once this “holy grail” is made, I would consider my quest for the ultimate compact camera complete! Until then, I think I will be quite content with the DP1. I might even bring along my GX100 too, just for the macro fun of it.

P.S.

A few people have asked why I haven’t included the Canon G9. This camera was never an option for me because its widest focal length of 35mm is simply not wide enough for my style of shooting. And lugging around a huge wideangle converter that is bigger than the camera itself kind of defeats the whole purpose. The G9 has an awesome zoom though, so if you’re into shooting long, this would be a good camera to consider.

UPDATES

8/22/08: I’ve temporarily abandoned my quest for the ultimate compact camera, and have eaten my own words about digital SLRs. I sold the DP1 and have been shooting an Olympus E-420, the smallest dSLR on the market. Read why I sold the DP1 here.

One exciting recent development is Olympus’s announcement of their upcoming “Micro Four Thirds” lens mount, which theoretically will enable them to produce even more compact SLRs and lenses. I am hoping that their target market with these will be the serious/professional photographer who wants top-notch quality and performance in an ever smaller and lighter package.

8/25/08: In September, another potential candidate for the Ultimate Compact Camera title will hit the shelves – the Panasonic LX3. The LX3 has similar specs as the Ricoh GX100, but after reading this informative initial review on DPreview.com, it looks as if the LX3 will offer a faster lens and faster operation, better image quality, and a fun 16:9 pano format option.

8/29/10: For the last 6 months or so, I’ve been shooting occasionally with a Panasonic GF1 with 20mm prime “pancake” lens. This camera is among the first generation of “Micro Four Thirds” cameras, along with the Olympus E-P1. The main concept of these cameras is that they are nearly compact-camera size, but with interchangeable lenses and relatively large and high quality image sensors. In other words, like really small SLRs.

After reading many reviews, I chose the GF1 over the E-P1 for two reasons: 1) reportedly faster and more accurate autofocusing, and 2) the very highly regarded quality of the Panasonic 20mm pancake lens (as opposed to the mediocre reviews of Oly’s 17mm version).

I should also say that my purpose for buying this camera was and is primarily for skiing/snowboarding action photography. I used it extensively this last season in Jackson Hole, and have found it to be excellent for my shooting style. I am almost always snowboarding alongside my partners, in backcountry terrain, and I have to stop during the descents to quickly pull out the camera and take continuous rapid-fire shots as my partner zooms by me. In this case, the fairly fast and continuous frame rate of the GF1 is an obvious advantage, but another huge advantage in this scenario is the fixed 20mm lens length (40mm equivalent). The lens length seems to offer a perfect range of workable distance to the subject – tight enough to usually capture some detailed human action, but wide enough to also capture some of the surrounding terrain. Also, always having the same fixed lens length enables me to act more instinctually – I generally know what distances will work, so I can quickly make a decision on where to stop and which way to shoot, all while anticipating where the skier will go relative to me. And of course the small size means that I can store the camera in my jacket’s chest pocket, quickly accessible.

While the GF1 is just about my perfect solution for ski/snowboard photography, I would not use it as an all-around landscape camera. This mainly has to do with the limitations of the lenses (why buy larger zoom lenses for this if the whole point is to go small and light?). Also, while the image resolution is excellent for a compact, it does pale in comparison to the outstanding resolution offered by the newest high end, full-frame dSLRs with their superior lenses. So for now I pretty much only use the GF1 for snowboarding and day hiking when I don’t expect to be doing serious landscape photography. Thus, the quest for the “Ultimate Compact Camera” continues…

Here’s how it works: If I had an accident that left me unable to walk out of the wilderness, I extend the antenna and press the button to activate the help signal. An internal GPS receiver acquires my GPS coordinates and the PLB transmits them along with my personal identification code through satellites to an NOAA station (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). The NOAA station then calls my emergency contacts (friends and family phone numbers that I’ve registered beforehand) to ensure that I am indeed out in the wilderness and it’s not a false alarm. They then contact the local Search and Rescue team, which would initiate a rescue operation – knowing my exact location.

I’ve taken the PLB on several week-long solo trips where I spent numerous days in remote basins far away from trails. If I got hurt in these places, I might not be found for days, or weeks, if at all. In these situations, I must admit that having the PLB gave me a great peace of mind. It is a noticeable comfort to know that I have some kind of safety net… some kind of connection to civilization. After all, no matter how much of a “mountain man” I think I am, I know that accidents can happen to anybody – that’s why they’re called accidents. And I’m sure that if something went wrong, any romantic illusions of braving the wild or being one with nature would quickly fade away as the severity of the situation sank in.

As you can see in the picture, this thing is pretty large, and it is heavy. It’s like putting a small brick into your pack. I’m sure that in the next several years PLBs will get smaller and smaller. Who knows, maybe cell phones will come equipped with this feature someday in the not too distant future (along with full coverage anyplace on the planet). But for now I do believe it’s worth the extra weight.

P.S. – Regardless of the technology in your pack, you should ALWAYS tell someone your plans and expected return date, in case all else fails.