m43 Musings

 

E-M1, m.Zuiko 12-50 EZ

The more I shoot with the E-M5.2, the more I'm reminded of just how flexible this little camera is. It really is a good little camera, especially when paired with a solid mid-range zoom. I think that the perfect 1 lens setup for this would be the 12-45/4 Pro, which is smaller & lighter than the 12-40/2.8 Pro I'm using this time around, but faster and better than the 12-50 EZ I used on my previous E-M5's. The 12-40 does work very well, but it's in some ways just a bit too much lens for the E-M5.2 to balance perfectly. 

If I do build my m43 kit back out, and that's looking very likely, this is what it would likely look like. 

Small kit:

E-M5.2, 9-18, 40-150R, either a 14-42 EZ or a 25/1.8

Around the city:

E-M5.2, Laowa 10/2, P14/2.5,  17/1.8, 25/1.8, 45/1.8

Backcountry:

E-M1.2/3, wide, 12-40 Pro, 40-150 Pro, 1.4x TC?

The good news is that there's really only 3 major investments here, the E-M1.2 or 1.3, the 40-150 Pro and a backcountry wide (if I go for a zoom rather than the Laowa 7.5mm). Almost everything else can be acquired cheaply except the 9-18 and Laowa 10/2, and frankly I could get away with only one of those for a good while and they're not that big an investment in the first place.

What about the Z5? To be frank, I'm not sure. I'm leaning towards keeping it, because if I sell it I'll just buy another Full Frame body because I can't resist the idea of FF and using all that lovely classic FF glass on it, and if I do that I'll probably do something silly like sell the m43 kit like I did to get my last A7II and also to get the Z5. What I really need to decide is if I'm going to add a 70-300E to my kit so I have a fully working hiking kit with the Z5. There's an insanely good sale on that lens this month, so I could grab one on Friday and then have a Z5 hiking kit of the 15/4, 24-50 and 70-300E for now (and eventually the E-M1 kit would semi-replace it with something that's better for bad conditions). Plus the Z5 could continue as a fun lens/bad light system long-term as well as being the digital in the film bag, a role m43 simply cannot do for me. I'd probably see the Z system grow with a few M or LTM lenses.

My film kit doesn't need much, I need a better 35mm, a small 20mm, a 85/90mm and a 135mm. Oh, and the tools I need to clean up my 200/4 so it can be used on film again (it's got a stuck aperture and I only use it on digital as a result, but I really do like the lens). The lenses will get added slowly over time but I really don't need much investment in my 35mm film kit, it's pretty complete even now.

Film Thoughts

 

Super Ricohflex, Velvia 50 

One of the challenges in going back to working with film seriously is that for a lot of work I really prefer shooting Medium Format to 135, and MF isn't cheap anymore. From an economic perspective one of the purely dumbest moves I ever made was selling my very complete Mamiya 645 Super setup back in 2012. I got maybe $400 for the lot and it probably would cost me north of $3000 to replace today, especially since I had the extremely desirable 80/1.9. Admittedly today I have generally less interest in 645 than I used to, largely because if I'm going to go in on MF, I want the larger negs you get from 6x6 or larger formats on 120 film.

I'd just pull out the Super Ricohflex, but it needs a CLA and a focus calibration (I'm not sure if it's just misaligned, or if the focus helical is frozen and the front elements are unscrewing themselves as a result). Alternatively, I could just pull the lens unit as a whole and mount it in a helical to use with my Goodman Zone. Might actually do that instead of putting money into what's still a sub-$100 camera. And I could always get the CLA later, pulling the taking lens from the Super Ricohflex is completely reversible. The challenge around cheap MF cameras like the Ricohflex's is that any service immediately exceeds the value of the camera, but replacing it usually puts you back in exactly the same position because none of these cameras have had a CLA in decades.

I think from this aspect, I really need to get my Goodman Zone build completed before I do anything else. That would give me a very workable 6x6/6x7 body with Zone or groundglass focusing. I need to buy hardware for it, plus a back and a lens. I'll probably just start by ordering the hardware to finish building the basic body.

Random Musings

Pentax 6x7, SMC Takumar 105/2.4, Agfa Scala 100

Been involved in an interesting discussion on FredMiranda based off a Professional Photographer's social media posting about why they continue to stick with DSLR's.

One of the commenters was going on about how Mirrorless isn't ready for prime time. A few of us started quizzing them about what they meant. Turned out it was a combination of buying Sony offerings obviously unsuited to their uses (A6x00's don't handle well with long lenses) and more importantly, refusing to read the manual. They had a number of issues with performance on the Olympus E-M1.2 that come down to they left the default settings then complained that the default settings didn't do what they wanted and rather than read the manual (the E-M1 series are insanely configurable and almost everything can be setup 5 different ways) they just used non-optimal workarounds and complained about it.

Rule #1. Learn your camera. Especially if switching systems (the guy in question was a long-time Nikon guy and seemed to expect identical behaviour from another brand's camera). If you don't learn your camera, don't expect to enjoy the experience. 

When I get a new camera I usually buy a guide (Thom Hogan's guides for Nikon, other writers handle other systems. There's excellent guides out there for Olympus and Fuji that I'm aware of, and I'm sure Canon, Sony, Panasonic and Leica all have 3rd party guides as well). I always spend a bunch of time figuring out what the bits I expect to use will do. I also have a pretty standard set of features I use (A & M modes, Auto ISO, FL settings for IBIS/Non-CPU lenses, bracketing and if the camera is capable of doing it in RAW mode, HDR/stacking) so going through and figuring out how the features I use regularly work is part of the new camera experience.

Rule #2. If you are doing something that challenges the camera, like Bird in Flight photography, go read some on doing that sort of work on that camera before complaining about the camera. There's plenty of guides online. Olympus for example has a great starter guide for BiF on their website which will give you good settings to start from. The defaults are almost never right for anything past general walkabout shooting.

 Moving on to other randomness, I'm a little frustrated with shooting the Z5 these days, and frankly am kind of regretting getting rid of the E-M1.2 to get it.

I still think the Z5 is a great camera, the body itself is not the source of my frustrations. It's the lens situation. 

There's three aspects to this.

1. I'm very hesitant about the Z 24-50. It screwed me in the cold. It handles poorly. The close focus isn't as good as I'd like. On the plus side it's excellent optically, the AF is speedy and the 52mm filter size is great when pairing with AI lenses, as it's the standard filter size for older Nikon glass.

2. The FTZ handling is meh at best. The chonky tripod mount blocks the body mount in many setups, so I need to have an L-bracket mounted to use a capture clip with the body + FTZ. The tripod mount also doesn't fit the hand well, and it's simply kinda porky and adds a lot of weight to the Z5+manual lens combos. I think I'm just going to have to accept at some point that adapting SLR lenses is just not working for me as a regular use setup. I love the idea, but I didn't like the reality on the A7II, I didn't like the reality on m43, I didn't like the reality on the Fuji's and I don't like the reality on the Z5 either, at least with the FTZ. I might try a 3rd party F mount adapter, but that will cost me EXIF.

3. Native Nikkor lenses. They're big, they're expensive and I just don't see myself buying into a system that pricey to deliver IQ that I just don't need. 

The challenge is that I REALLY like the body itself. My challenges are all around what to put in front of it. I'll admit I've been spoiled by the m.Zuiko PRO 12-40/2.8 for its small size, ridiculously good close focus performance (0.2m and SHARP) and optical quality. 

I see three options.

1. The simplification option. Trade Z5 kit in on an E-M1.2 as soon as Henry's gets one in used (or special order a new one at the current pricing, which gets me a new one for $200). I get hosed on my investment, but get a working kit relatively quickly.

2. The glass option. Trade Z5 in and use the credit for glass for m43 and/or film kit. That could get me a really awesome couple lenses for film (ZF.2 25/2.8 and 50/1.4) which pair well with my 105/2.5, or some nice options for m43. I'd re-buy the E-M1.2 at a later date. Still get hosed on my Z5 investment here but it could round out one of the kits very quickly.

3. Keep the Z5, move to using it with native 3rd party lenses/adapted M/LTM/FE lenses. I like the Z5 better than any Sony bodies, so I'd effectively remove my reliance on adapting SLR lenses for more compact adaptation options like M and FE mounts, and/or buying some of the 3rd party manual lenses from TTArtisan, 7Artisans and Laowa. I end up with a bunch of capital tied up in a body that's basically a side project, but on the flip side I keep a body I really do enjoy while investing in glass that better suits how I work with it and removes some of the handling warts. And I still have the FTZ to use with F mount lenses if and when it's needed. I'd put more into the m43 side as that would become my primary hiking kit. 

Frankly, what will likely happen is either #1 or #3. #1 if I continue to get more frustrated with the Z5 lens situation, #3 otherwise. #2 option 1 puts the investment in an area I'm unwilling to bet on, I'm still not sure if film is going to remain a major part of my work, it's really enjoying a boost right now because of the level of instagram engagement I'm getting and generally liking film for around town/found item work. I'm not sure I've any interest in expanding it beyond that though, and I kind of expect the rate of shooting to taper off some as things open up and I can get out in the woods again. 

Gear Simplification - The Never Ending Quest.

Nikon FE, Ilford HP5+ in Rodinal 1:50

Gear Simplification is something that absolutely drives me nuts. Every time I get some time to think about my setup, I start looking at gear simplification. 

Two simple reasons:

1. I want the simplest setup possible for my needs.

2. I like buying gear.

Needless to say, those are two diametrically opposed items.

Looking at the gear I have lying around, I can put it into four categories.

1. Absolutely never sell:

FE, 55/3.5 AI Micro, Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4 LTM and 105/2.5 AI-S

Two of these are heirlooms (the FE and 55/3.5), one is my cold dead hands lens (5cm f1.4) and the last I've rebought every time I've sold one, I'd be a fool to do it again. 

2. I really like, but could part with if it made sense:

F2a, X-T2, Z5 bodies

7Artisans 12/2.8, Fujinon XC35/2, Laowa 15/4, Z 24-50 f4-6.3, m.Zuiko Pro 12-40/2.8, Super-Takumar 35/3.5, 7Artisans 18/6.3 UFO (yes, really).

3. I'm OK with it, but not too attached.

X-T1 body, Super Ricohflex

Neewer 25/1.8 MC, Nikkor 24/2.8 K, Nikkor-H 28/3.5, Nikkor 200/4 AI, Super-Takumar 135/3.5, Vivitar 70-150 f3.8, Nikkor 50/1.8G AF-S

4. I'd dump in a heartbeat if somebody was actually interested

Coronet 12-Twenty

Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AI, Nikkor 300/4.5 K AI'd, Hanimex 135/2.8 M42

Note this is the kit that might get actively shot. I've got a couple box cameras and a Soligor 300/5.6 that are heirlooms, but don't figure in as they are not active shooting gear and won't see use.

The challenge? What would a minimalist kit actually look like?

Well, in terms of film, I could readily get by with the following:

FE, Nikkor 24/2.8, 55/3.5 Micro, 105/2.5 AI-S

That would be minimalist, but workable. No low-light option, but I don't have that today really anyways.

For digital?

Z5, 15/4, 24-50, 50/1.8G, 105/2.5 could work.

X-T2, 12/2.8, XC35, 55/3.5 also works.

Re-acquire an E-M1.2 and use the 12-40 + 105/2.5 and add an UWA option (Laowa 7.5/2 or 10/2, or a 9-18). Eventually that might become the 12-40/2.8, 40-150/2.8 and the UWA. 

I really wish my brain could settle on a kit. This is why I so rarely get to one year of ownership on a digital camera. 

One thing I keep coming back to is that any attempt to make the Fuji more than a minimalist/manual focus kit bumps into the issue that it quickly matches the Z5 for size/weight while delivering IQ barely better than the E-M1.2 for single shot and inferior to the Oly's for multishot. I'm also finding that for all I like the idea of Fuji's classic UI, the only time it's been really been a benefit was shooting night work at Torrance Barrens last summer. This is part of what drove me to the E-M1.2 and Z5 earlier this year. 

So today I hauled in all the Fuji kit. X-T2, X-T1, the XC35, 7Artisans 12/2.8 and 18/6.3 UFO, the Neewer 25mm, the USB charger, spare batteries, USB power kit et al, and came home with an E-M5 Mark II.

Why that body?

1. E-M1.2's are just coming off the end of a ridiculous sale and are unobtanium right now, new or used, as a result.

2. The E-M5 Mark III has a worse EVF than the Mark II and no USB webcam support, so it can't do everything I used the X-T2 regularly for even if it does have PDAF and the better 20MP sensor. Webcam support was the deciding factor here, I do need that capability.

3. The E-M5 Mark II can get paired with small lenses for a very pocketable kit, essentially replacing the X-T1+18 UFO combo with something more capable if I track down a cheap Panasonic 14/2.5.

4. I already have some accessories for the body, namely a grip and a USB charger that I kept when I sold my last one in fall 2019. 

5. I got a new one for used cost. It was seriously cheap for an open-box but fully warrantied body with all accessories.

I'm aware I don't like the IQ on the 16MP Mark II as much as the 20MP bodies, or larger sensor bodies and long-term expect this is really a replacement for the X-T1 as an almost-P&S, although it can handle most of what I was doing with the X-T2 as well until I fill out the system (I still see another E-M1.2 in my future). But it should be a pretty solid setup paired with the small but superb 12-40/2.8 Pro.

 

The F2 is Complete, and a Return to PanF+

 

Nikon F2a, 105/2.5 AI-S, Ilford PanF+ stand developed in Rodinal 1:100

I was able to pick up a DP-11 metering head for my erstwhile-headless F2 last week, which gives me a fully functional F2a (the 'a' indicates the DP-11 configuration). That's basically the same setup I had with my original F2a, but a much older body as my original one was 79 production and my current body dates to 1973, the DP-11 is a few years newer.

I immediately shot up the last of the test roll in the body, only to discover that like an idiot I'd loaded it last fall with Superia X-Tra 400 rather than the HP5+ I'd thought I had put in the body. Double oops, as that old expired HP5+ is something I've been shooting at EI 125 (a 2/3rds of a stop pull from the EI200 I often use with HP5+. Luckily C-41 should handle ~2 stops of overexposure OK. 

At least now I actually have a box tag in the memo holder so I can document what's actually loaded.

As soon as I'd polished off the last of the Superia, I loaded some PanF+, and this is the first image from that roll. I missed focus, it's back focused, but I do like the shot overall. It reminds me why I love PanF+, it's gorgeous tonality, minimal grain even in stand-developed Rodinal and so easy to work with if you can deal with the low speed.

The F2a is pretty much how I remember. A brick, but a delightful one to work with. it's so nice to have a real manual, mechanical SLR again, there's just a joy in shooting with these bodies that's hard to duplicate in more electronics-infested bodies. 

This does remind me, so often I've prioritized bodies over anything else, but I really do have almost everything I really need right now in terms of bodies. I'm going to make a concerted effort to quit buying more bodies, with 2 exceptions. Those being a proper MF SLR (probably an RB67) and maybe another E-M1 Mark II to use with that 12-40 I just can't bring myself to sell. 

If I add gear, aside from those two specific items, the gear needs to be lenses or accessories. And I want to actively try to hold onto every body I currently own for minimum one year.

And a Couple Film Milestones Too

Mamiya 645 Super, Ilford PanF (expired) stand developed in Rodinal, lens unrecorded but probably the 80/1.9 C

I passed two milestones on my film shooting this week, recording my 800th roll of 35mm film since I started shooting film as an adult in 2003, and my 600th roll of B&W film over the same period. That also puts me at 12 rolls shot this year, the most I've shot since 2016, I didn't break 10 rolls in 2017 or 2020 and shot no film at all in 2018 & 2019. 

I also cleared out the last of my B&W backlog, developing the last roll of 120 I had leftover from my days with the 645 Super, a roll of HP5+ pushed to EI800 that had been sitting since 2012. The only roll of B&W in my to-develop pile is the roll of HP5+ in 135 that I shot yesterday on my daily walk. Now I need to work on clearing out the colour and slide backlog. I've still got two rolls of 120 E-6 to get developed and 8 rolls of colour 135, mostly from the FG and FE, as well as 4 rolls of E-6 135 dating back to the Maxxum 7 and 2012 or so. I think I'll start dropping them off 2 at a time over the coming weeks. 

That reminds me that I do miss my Maxxum 7's. I had 3 of them, originally a very beat up one with an equally beat up 24-105D, then later a NOS one and a spare, plus a single VC-7 grip with a decent selection of lenses (17-35D, 24-105, 24/2.8, Sony 50/1.4 D, Sony 85/2.8 SAM). Think I even still have the remote release for them. If I was to get back into AF film shooting, I'd really be tempted by another Maxxum 7 even though an F100 would make FAR more sense as I already have a great selection of Nikon glass, and all but 3 of my Nikon lenses work on the F100 (two of course aren't in F mount, the Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4 LTM and the Z 24-50 f4-6.3, and my 24/2.8 K is not AI Converted so can't mount on the F100). A mount glass is getting cheap these days as well.  

With regards to the Maxxum 7, I liked the smaller size and lower weight of the body, without giving up too much performance compared to the F100. The F80 for me was always a fun body, but without AI compatibility it can only use two lenses I own, both 50mm (the 50/1.8D and 50/1.8G), that's fine as a near-P&S, but not for serious shooting. Nikon never really did anything comparable to the Maxxum 7 and that's a pity, it sits perfectly between the F80 and F100 in capability.

Frankly, I've also been wanting to get something to shoot my M42 lenses on film, and just remembered the Maxxum 7 does very well with that and I still have an adapter handy. Hmm, that's a two birds with one stone kinda solution. Beats buying a cheap Cosina SLR in K mount and then tracking down an M42 adapter for K mount.

That said, there's some gaps in my lens kit that need filling before I add any new bodies or mounts. A 20mm (to replace the 20/2.8 AF I sold), probably the f3.5 AI-S version as it's good, tiny and has a 52mm filter thread like most of my other Nikkors. I also want an 85/90mm and a 135mm to gap fill, right now I only have the 105mm in the 55mm to 200mm gap. I also need to get a lens wrench so I can tear down my 200/4 and properly clean the oil off the aperture blades. It's got a really sticky aperture. I'm thinking the 85/90 and the 135 are priorities here.

Further out, I'd like to add the 35 and 100mm Series E lenses as compact & lightweight alternatives to my current options at those focal lengths. A 200/4 Micro would be good as well for bugging. Probably should see my eye out for either the AI ring for my current 24/2.8 or an AI or AI-S version so I'm not as limited in what cameras I can use the 24 on and the 28/2.8 AI-S would pair nicely with my old 28/3.5 to give a couple options at a favourite focal length. 

Long term, Zeiss ZF and ZF.2 primes are on my radar, they're getting cheap enough to consider now and while larger & heavier than the Nikkors, they bring some quality gains I'd like. Might even start with the 25/2.8 as an alternative to getting another Nikkor 24. The 25/2.8 is generally tied with the 50/1.4 as the cheapest ZF series lens and its excellent close focus performance is well suited to my style.

Finally on the 35mm side, I'd love to use my Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4 on film again. That means I'd need to acquire an LTM or M mount rangefinder. I've got a soft spot for the Bessa R, but I've always wanted a Canadian-made M4-2 or M4-P (my real dream is to own one of the few late M4's made in Canada, but that's extremely unlikely for me to find or be able to afford, these are the only really collectible Midland M's). Maybe a Christmas present for myself, but given the Bessa R was only an occasional shooter the last time around, I'm not going to put a lot of budget into getting one. 

I've also found the MF bug hitting me again. I do just love those big negs and smooth tones. I've been working on printing a Dora Goodman Zone 2.0, a 3D printed 6x6/6x7 camera that uses Mamiya Press lenses or LF lenses in a helical and either RB67 Pro S backs or a printed 6x6 back, and can be focused either by zone focusing or a nifty little groundless back (actually it uses either mylar sheet or tracing paper instead of glass). Here I think I'll spring for a cheap Press lens, 110mm or 127mm likely and an RB back, then see how it works out for me. If I dig it, I might parlay that into an RB setup paired with the Zone for a heavy/light system. Not sure I want to go back to 645, a TLR or the Zone will do light MF better and as a better than 35mm landscape setup 6x6+ or digital makes sense.

 

The Battle of Two Instagrams

 

OM-4T, Tri-X

I've had my second Instagram account now for 9 days, I've posted 9 images to it. I'm averaging over 20 likes per post, double what my main IG gets, and am up to 29 followers already (vs my main which has been sitting at 149 followers for weeks)

It seems pretty clear so far that the IG community likes my B&W film found item & cityscape work better than my nature and landscape work on digital.

I think there's several reasons for this.

First off is simple consistency. My Filmic IG is very consistent in the sort of work that gets posted. In fact it's all Ilford HP5+ on Nikon film bodies right now, and heavy on the found items. My main IG is much more diverse and probably pays a price for that.

Second is the sort of accounts I follow. My main mostly follows big name landscape shooters and youtube personalities. I've only really got one big name on my follow list for the Filmic IG (Matt Day).

Also by extension, I don't engage much with the accounts I follow on my main beyond likes. So far I've engaged much more on the Filmic IG than with the main IG, because I'm largely interacting with smaller accounts where I'm one of just a few commenters, so I don't feel like my comment is just lost in the chaff.

Where does that leave me? Well it means that for now I am going to continue to put effort into the Filmic IG. I'll keep posting to my main IG of course, but I suspect it's never going to really grow unless I decide to get disciplined about both regular posting and subject matter.

I am halfway tempted to start an IG account just for the X-T1+UFO lens combo though.