My good friend and fellow photographer, Sam Bruno, stopped by excited about some rumours after he had read predictions regarding upcoming changes to the next Nikon camera. Rumours, predictions, prophesies, opinions, and conjecture by so-called insiders about what camera manufacturers will be doing in the future are rarely very accurate, but fun to talk about anyway.

I dug out an article that I wrote in 2007 on a magazine commentary I thought might be an entertaining re-read.  In the May 1974 (39 years ago) issue of Photo World Magazine was an article entitled “Tomorrow’s Camera: Report from Japan.”  The article by author Tony Chiu first discussed what would be the “next major technological breakthrough in Japanese-manufactured SLRs…a solid-state shutter, which would make cameras less prone to jamming,” and praised that breakthrough. One must remember that in 1974 cameras were mechanically pulling film off a roll, and in front of the shutter.

On miniaturization, he wrote that, “The manufacturers had misgivings about reducing the current dimensions of their SLRs because the decreasing weight reduced protection against shutter vibration.”

On lenses Chiu commented that, “It is conceivable that 10 years from now a compound lens (a lens that has several elements, like all lenses have now) may weigh more than the SLR body. Although light weight, plastic lenses have long been an industry dream, there is today no major research toward their development.”

In the article he mentioned also that electronic shutter cameras “in the next decade” would be an  “expensive option available only to top-of-the-line models.”  I am amazed at the changes that have occurred since 1974.  Is it conceivable that the writer of that article would have been astonished at modern developments, and would the thought have crossed his mind that even inexpensive cameras would have electronics?

This next part is really interesting because each of the major companies was asked what their predictions for cameras of the future would be:

Canon – Suichi Ando visualized a portable camera small enough “to be carried in the pocket”, and capable of using 35mm film. Such an instrument would have a “universal lens, which can be changed by the flip of the finger from microphotography to telephotography.”

Nikon – Takateru Koakimoto said that the perfect camera would be one that excludes the chance of human error: “It will be fully automatic, perhaps with a small computer to control the exposure.”  I say that he wasn’t far off in his prediction.

Olympus – Yoshihisa Maitanni believed the ideal camera would have a universal lens and one button will wind the film, focus the picture, frame the image and make the perfect exposure.  He also thought that “Images will be projected directly on to a sensitized material,” fully edited, and enlarged.

Ricoh – Tomomasu Takeshita predicted that major advances in the film industry would reduce the film size. “Within 20 years the 16mm camera will replace today’s 35mm camera.” Such an instrument, as he saw it, would be considerably smaller and simpler – it would have a one-piece plastic lens in a partial return to the “pinhole concept” as well as an “electronic crystal” shutter.

Yashica – Nobukazu Sato’s dream was one that would not utilize film. “Just put the paper into the camera, make the exposure, pull the paper out and spray it.” Such a camera would make use of ultraviolet rays, and would also feature a universal lens and a fully automatic focusing system.  Both Ricoh and Yashica are no longer manufacturing cameras.

The writer of the article continues to say “Will we see such marvels in or lifetime?”

“Perhaps by the end of this century” a photographer’s choice could be  “For the amateur, a single lightweight, compound (today one would use the word “zoom”) lens will replace three or four of today’s standard lenses. And price – as it is today (1974) – will remain just within reach at the upper end of your budget.”

Digital camera technology wasn’t even a dream in 1974. Yes, they were printing digitally, but not taking pictures.  I can remember one of my first jobs working as a photographer for the California Office of Alternative Education in 1972. I bought myself the newest and coolest Pentax camera, a Spotmatic II.  The batteries it used aren’t even made today. And Pentax had just come out with a technological breakthrough, “multicoated lenses”. Will the cameras that we think are amazing today even be around in 20 years? I wonder what the future will bring?

I always appreciate comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

I recently read a post on Facebook regarding photographing landscapes that said, “I’m not too sure how you’re supposed to choose a focal point when everything can be so similar…I focused on the tree, but not sure how that works for the composition.”

I was impressed with that post when considering that most people seem to just select some automated mode, point their camera, and release the shutter when photographing a landscape.  And, unlike the person that placed that post searching for answers to make her photographs better, many photographers are satisfied with not so sharp compositions.

My retort, all too quickly, was to review depth-of-field, but the Facebook reply box is limiting and not a very good place for such a broad discussion.

In my opinion a scenic/landscape photograph should be sharp, bottom to top. When I say that, I mean those elements in the foreground closest to the viewer should be in focus, and those in the distance should also be sharp enough to show some detail.

For landscape photographers intent on controlling the field of focus in their images, from front to back, do so by learning to manage depth-of-field.

Depth-of-field is defined as, “that area around the main subject, in front of and behind, that is in acceptably sharp focus”, and that will be, of the total field of focus, one-third in front and two-thirds behind the main subject.

Depth of field is controlled with the aperture. The smaller the lenses aperture is the more the area of focus, or depth of field, will be. I prefer using a smaller aperture for scenic photography. Most landscape photographers desire an image that appears sharp throughout the scene, so that elements of foreground interest look just as sharp as the distant horizon. Depth of field does not abruptly change from sharp to unsharp, but instead is a gradual transition. Everything immediately in front of, or in back of, the main subject begins to lose sharpness.

Many use a rule of thumb where one focuses roughly 1/3 of the way into a scene in order to achieve maximum sharpness throughout. While this isn’t optimal because the precise distance also depends on factors like subject distance, aperture, and focal length, it is better that just pointing and depending on the camera’s computer to make that decision.

My suggestion to that aspiring landscape photographer would be to begin by mounting the camera on a good, sturdy tripod. The tripod will negate the need to worry about slow shutter speeds that will likely appear on anything other than bright sunny days. I would also select either Manual or Aperture priority modes because as I wrote, the size of the aperture controls the depth-of-field or, in other words, the field of focus from near to far in the composition. I would then chose an aperture of f/8 or smaller. I would meter the scene and set the shutter to the proper exposure, or as with Aperture priority, let the camera select the shutterspeed.

I might be using a polarizer or a graduated neutral density filter, but that doesn’t matter as long as the camera is steady, the meter reading is correct and the depth of field is enough to cover important elements in my capture.

I always appreciate you comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

On a business trip to Canada in 1840 an Englishman named Pattinson made the first known scenic photograph in this country.  A student of an early form of photography perfected by Louis Jacques Mande Daguerre, Pattinson set up his camera at Niagara Falls, and produced the now cherished historical Daguerreotype photograph.

That Daguerreotype would have taken more than 20 minutes for the scene to expose on a silver-coated plate inside his camera.  Later the photographer would surround the plate with warm mercury fumes that would slowly make the image visible.

Those Canadian scenic landscape photographers reading this are part of a long history of photographing this country since that moment.

Last week a photographer stopped by my shop looking for a scenic lens. After looking around a bit she asked, “What is the best lens for scenic photography?”

That is a question that is all too familiar, especially from those new to the medium in the process of spending their hard earned money on equipment.

I suggested she take a look at zoom lenses that will give her the most versatility without having to spend the big bucks. There are lenses, for example, like the 18-70mm, 18-200mm, or even 70-300mm are reasonably light and give lots of choices of perspective. However, instead of just recommending a particular lens for scenic photography I wanted her to begin thinking about perspective.

A wide-angle lens has a curved front surface allowing for a wider view. Distances between the foreground and background subjects will be extreme, and the subject closer to the lens will be larger. When using a 18mm focal length for a portrait, the person’s nose will be big and the ears will be small. A 200mm lens will give a more tightly compressed view and distances between the foreground and background subjects will not look as extreme as the wider 18mm focal length. 200mm would be a better lens for photographing that person’s face because of the compressed perspective. An example we commonly see is when we watch a baseball game, and the pitcher looks very close to the catcher, which is caused by the compression of the long focal length lens.

Here is a more practical example. I am photographing a waterfall with cliffs in the background, and with wet rocks in the foreground. If I use a long focal length like the 200mm all the elements will be compressed in the final image with no subject gaining significance over another. However, if I fitted my camera with a 18mm lens the foreground subjects will be larger and more significant, creating distance to the background. Both would be good renditions, just different.

I believe the best lens depends on the perspective that the photographer wants to view in the final image. One must think about the perspective front to back, how much of the scenic is important as in a wide, or narrow, aspect. It comes down to the personal vision and what he or she wants to say about the landscape being captured.

Famous scenic photographer Ansel Adams advised,  “problem solve for the final photograph”.

Like Adams, photographers should think about how the final photograph will be used and how to accomplish that. If one thinks of a final photograph as a series of problems to be solved there will be a smooth transition from initial idea to final print.

There is no one lens that can be termed a “scenic or landscape” lens. Any lens might be used as long as it meets the photographer’s vision. That vision might be to include a wide vista with a wide-angle lens or on the other hand, a tighter cropped image created with a telephoto lens might be visually more powerful. The choice of lens for scenics comes down to what the photographer wants the viewer to feel and see.

Have a comment? Don’t hesitate – I like comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

“Let’s all go to the country fair, there’s blossoms, and ribbons, and hope in the air.  The harvest’s in the endless bin, and Grandpa can bring the old mare.”  Anonymous.

In British Columbia the months of August and September are the season of fall fairs.  Communities large and small host events filled with exhibits of local crops, poultry, livestock, and all sorts of crafts, and the outdoor shows include rodeos, many different horse competitions, and even lawnmower racing. There are action packed midways that include amusement rides and challenges for the children like wall climbing, and there is food. The inviting and almost demanding smell of all kinds of mouthwatering foods confronts participants as far away as the entrance gate as they pull a few dollars out of their pockets to pay the entrance fee enticing everyone to make their next stop one of the food booths.

For this year’s Labour Day weekend my wife and I had the choice of two popular fairs, both about an hour away from our home, the Armstrong Fall Fair, or Interior Provincial Exhibition, is south, and the Barriere Fall Fair, or North Thompson Fall Fair is north.

We have attended both fairs over the years. Armstrong is larger, but this year we decided on Barriere, and besides I have more friends in Barriere.

I mounted my 18-200mm on my camera for our day’s excursion. The 18-200mm is a perfect walking-around lens for events like the one my wife and I were attending. I didn’t need a real wide, long telephoto, or fast aperture lens, as most exposures were ISO 400.  I always employed as fast a shutterspeed as I could and my aperture was usually f/8 or f/11.

The sky had a few clouds and the warm day was perfect for strolling through the small community’s fall fair. I looked around as I walked through the gate and into the excitement-filled fair thinking how that event was ideal for those of us that are always searching for something different to photograph.

The mid-way offered shots of vendors and interesting people engrossed in their visit to the fair. There was a large Agriplex building that presented opportunities to photograph livestock. I got some great images of young 4-H’ers in action and just outside I photographed cowboy musicians, magicians, and children on a climbing wall.

We got there late so I missed the horse pull, but I watched the Lawn Mower racing. Yes, I just wrote “lawn mover racing”. Who would have thought there would be such action, or any action at all from a lawnmower? But there they were, zooming around the dirt track. I have photographed running athletes, horse racing, stockcar, and motorcycle racing, to name a few, however, now I can add lawnmower racing to my resume.

I have always enjoyed community fairs, even before I started carrying a camera around. Nevertheless, ever since I have had my camera events like the Barriere Fall Fair has been great fun with the multitude of different subjects ready to be photographed.  For those photographers that haven’t yet ventured into that fertile photo territory, all I can say, if there is one coming to a fairground near you, put it on your calendar.

I always appreciate your comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

What does a photographer do on a rainy day?  This photographer’s options don’t include getting his clothes and equipment wet. When the rain outside has filled the paths with puddles I try to fine momentary instances when the sky lightens up for some shooting and then creating with Photoshop.

After two hot and dry summer months dark clouds rolled in seemingly out of nowhere and the rain came down. The damp, cool, afternoon breeze was a nice refreshing change, but I had just set my camera bag and tripod on the porch and was planning to make an afternoon drive to a local waterfall when it began to pour. Well, that excursion was out.

What does a photographer do? I suppose I could have turned on some music and picked up the unfinished novel I have been trying to get back to. There were some silly movies on the television, and I could have snuggled up on the couch and watched one or two, or (and I liked this one the least) I could have pushed my way into my messy workshop to continue the never-ending job of cleaning up. However, none of those seemed all that interesting as I stood looking at the rain falling on the garden out the front door.

Fortunately for me the rain wasn’t hard and constant. It would come and go, leaving spaces of time for clearing, with moments of sun poking through the clouds. So during some clear moments, I mounted a macro lens on my camera, grabbed my tripod and went outside.

I looked for interesting plants with raindrops to photograph until the rain began again, then I’d go back inside and wait for the next lull in the rain, however, I then had image files that I could download to my computer. And while I waited to go out again I could sit and creatively work with the pictures I just captured.

I spent the afternoon that way, I’d go out when the rain lightened up, wander around the yard and photograph anything with water drops that caught my eye, return to the house when the rain returned and work on those image files till I could go out again. I snacked, had a couple glasses of wine, and spent a great afternoon with photography. What could be better than that?

There is always something in the garden no matter the weather, sun, snow or, like on that enjoyable day, intermittent rain. The slight overcast day was perfect for my subjects. Bright sun will increase a subject’s contrast making it hard to capture details in the extremes, and I wanted to hold on to what details I could. The diffused daylight reduced the number of f/stops from black to white.

I used two different lenses, a 200mm macro lens and a 70-180mm macro. I wasn’t after anything in particular so I just changed lenses depending on my mood. I positioned a reflector sometimes, used a wireless, off-camera flash mounted on a light stand for others, and neither when the sun really came out.

I suppose I am a bit of an opportunist and I regularly can be seen wandering around the yard and neighborhood with my camera in search of nothing in particular.  I just like taking pictures rain or shine.

About getting out there with a camera the famous French photographer Jacques-Henri Lartigue said it best, “It’s marvelous, marvelous! Nothing will ever be as much fun. I’m going to photograph everything, everything!”               I am in complete agreement, how about you?

I look forward to your comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com