|
The Search for a Low Light Candids CameraVersion 1.2, © 2009 by Dale Cotton, all rights reserved I am writing this purely to sort out my own thoughts. Very little of what I do as an artist appeals even remotely to the majority of people on this planet; and the more I grow as an artist the further I seem to wander from the path of popular appeal. So, in order for the following analysis to be of interest to you, you would first have to agree that pictures like this are worth making:
Fig. 1: Matthew, Mika, Grandma (K20D: 1600 ISO, 1/30th, f/5.6) You can call this a snapshot or a candid or an environmental portrait, as you like. Key aspects for me: shooting indoors (even at night) without flash and unposed, live subjects. This is also similar to the more familiar street photography genre, with the additional requirement of low light capability. SymptomsI currently own two digital cameras: the Pentax K20D, a high resolution medium-sized dSLR; plus a Panasonic LX1, a medium resolution pocket camera. The LX1 is a fine camera in medium and bright light, but even at 400 ISO things break down very quickly:
Fig. 2: Jack Astor's #4 (LX1: 400 ISO, 1/5th, f/4.5)
Fig. 3: Jack Astor's #4 detail Fig. 2 is the result of shooting raw, developing in Raw Therapee to minimize noise, then using Noise Ninja for full chroma and minimal luminance noise reduction. We can take the resulting pointillism clearly seen in Fig. 3 as being artistic – but the detail destruction is so extensive that very little flexibility is left to the artist (even more so if full luminance NR is added). A further problem is that at 400 ISO in light this low, shutter speeds are very long.
Fig. 4: Jack Astor's #2 (LX1: 400 ISO, 1/6th, f/4.9) Such long exposures result in motion blur as in Fig. 4, both from subject and from camera, in spite of Panasonic's excellent image stabilization. Again, this can be viewed as artistic licence; but, again, it is beyond the control of the artist. If I wanted steadiness and the retention of a certain level of detail, I'd be out of luck.
Fig. 5: Carol, Pippin, Jody detail (click for full frame) On the other hand, as Fig. 5 attests, the K20D, like any recent APS-C dSLR, produces a far more usable image at 3200 ISO than the LX1 does at 400 ISO. If I want to look for even better high ISO handling, I need look no farther than the Nikon D700, which would buy me two stops lower noise even than the K20D at any given ISO. For a mere three grand I'd have the current ultimate in low light handling. But the cost of the D700 is more than just monetary. It's bigger and heavier than the K20D, meaning I'd be even less likely to have it with me at any given moment in time. On top of that the D700, like any SLR, looks like a serious camera, which has a disastrous effect on living subjects – they become self-conscious and pose, freeze, or turn hostile – either way the spontaneity of the moment is toast. So, in fact, the little LX1 is pretty much the ideal size and shape for a candid moments camera. Everyone assumes the user is just another non-photographer, grabbing a casual snapshot for memory lane. Let's call this the Folksiness Form Factor, or FFF (pronounced "triple-F"). And yet another SLRs issue is their loud shutter/mirror noise.
Fig. 6: A) Jes' Folks vs. B) The Stare But even the Folksiness Form Factor requirement is not the only physical constraint for a candids camera. Anyone who ever used a point & shoot or compact digital camera five years or longer ago will remember shutter lag. Your toddler or pet is doing something priceless, you have the camera out, turned on, and pointing at the scene, you press the shutter release button ... and a full second later – long after the magic moment has passed – the camera finally exposes the frame. Today's small cameras have much less shutter lag, but when shooting raw the wait time between exposures is often three seconds or more. We can bunch all such factors that contribute to being able to grab a shot instantaneously under the term: responsiveness. I've read more than once that the responsiveness of today's generation of small cameras, like the Panasonic LX3 and the Canon G10, simply isn't there for "serious" work. Yet responsiveness is an area that is defined by the traditional 35mm rangefinder; and its manual film advance, manual focus, manual exposure, and single focal length lenses are deemed acceptable.
That pretty much sums up my modest requirements:
Resolution, the usual make/break for photo enthusiasts, is virtually irrelevant in low light, since high ISO noise and hand-holding tend to destroy whatever ultra-fine detail might have been there. Another advantage to high-res sensors is that colour subtlety tends to be higher, given how Bayer patterning works – but this too falls prey to high ISO noise. DiagnosisThe following are the cameras I'm aware as being candidates to meet the above requirements, followed by my critiques (any red flag is a personal show-stopper):
¹ A number like 1600 in the Noise/ISO column is the lowest unacceptable ISO (see below). ² The D700 is hand-holdable even without sensor IS because of its usable 12800 ISO. ³ I include the M8 purely for the sake of completeness, given it's price. I may be a Philistine for flagging the lack of zooms ... if I were a Philistine, perhaps I could afford both the M8 and the Tri-Elmarit. I give the M8 a pass on FFF more out of tradition than conviction; at a minimum, one would have to tape over the red dot and Leica logo. * K20D, D90, 50D...: virtually all APS-C dSLRs have similar size, noise, etc.; advantage goes to those with in-body IS. ** The XSi gets a warning on exposure control due to lack of true spot meter plus only 2 stops exposure compensation. *** The G1, XSi, and E520 get a Folksiness warning, not a fail, despite their SLR styling, given their smallish size combined with the ability to use them via LCD and live view.
Fig. 7: A) Canon G10 at 400 ISO vs. B) Panasonic G1 at 800 ISO – both with zero noise reduction applied My evaluation of high ISO noise was done from in-store test shots supplemented by raw test shots downloaded from Imaging Resource. I developed these in Raw Therapee with both noise reduction and sharpening turned off, then performed chroma noise and luminance reduction at various settings in Noise Ninja. Anyone looking for a low noise raw-capable camera could do worse than to repeat the above. I used Raw Therapee due to its excellent demosaicing routines, which minimize noise without actually applying noise reduction. Treatment... for me, at least, is to wait. No ideal low-light candids camera currently exists. If I had to buy now, the Canon XSi might be the best of bad bunch, but in my case there's nothing enough better than my Pentax K20D for low light candids to warrant spending money on at this time. If I were able to accept an 800 ISO ceiling, I'd definitely opt for the G1; it looks to be a fabulous little camera. In fact, if the price falls low enough and no better option appears in the interim, I may yet buy one and do what I can within the 800 limitation. Perhaps a consolation prize for all the fiddling that went into producing this piece, my subconscious managed to clear through a bit of my usual dimness to come up with this idea:
Fig. 8: quasi-FFF with SLR via live view In the process of creating Fig. 6, I realized that a key element of the folksiness subterfuge is that the photographer's face be visible to the subject and assuming a reasonably aw-shucks expression. Since the K20D does have a crude form of live view, I can hold it as shown in Fig. 8, and by removing the lens hood, reduce the SLR impact a tad further. Using a smaller lens might also help. The downside is that the K20D makes a double shutter release sound for each picture taken using live view. No one's going to mistake a full-size SLR for a compact, and seeing one held out instead of to the eye may just draw attention to what's going on; but it's certainly worth a try. Another aspect of doing street/candids is a bit of play-acting on the part of the photographer. A funky hat and a humble, aw-shucks expression or a slightly dazed demeanor go a long way to blending into the background. The trick is to use a camera that doesn't break character. Ultimately, it's not possible – short of hiding – to take pictures without your subjects knowing what's going on. What I want is to be forgotten or overlooked quickly enough that my subjects get back to doing whatever they were doing and essentially forget my presence. PrognosisUnfavourable. There have been some hints that at least one of the major players is working on something like the Panasonic G1 but with an APS-C/H sensor inside. The larger sensor in turn requires a larger lens mount, so the temptation for manufacturers might be to stick to their current SLR lens mount. The result could either be a rectangular, rangefinder-looking design (LCD only), or just a slightly more compact dSLR design (EVF + LCD). If the design team resisted the temptation to up the current 12 mp default for APS-C/H, high ISO noise would be equal or even better than in today's APS-C/H dSLRs. Panasonic and Olympus are undoubtedly working on future micro 4/3rds (G1-style) models, but I see little hope that their push will be to decrease high ISO noise instead of increasing megapixel counts. The Leica M8's development difficulties, cost, and many image quality issues illustrate some of the reasons there is unlikely to be anything forthcoming in the digital rangefinder category. Finder parallax problems and long telephoto support are issues that are intrinsic to the rangefinder design. As much as you and I might be willing to accept these weaknesses, the Japanese camera companies have to consider sales volume, which just isn't going to be there.
|
