Adventures of an Idiot - occasional ramblings of a photography freak

And now for the next enthralling episode about the breaking-in of the GX20.
Breaking in, smashing up… they’re only separated by the extent of my patience.
For the story so far read this.

So, to continue…

Well, now I come to think about it there’s not really a lot to add. I’ve confirmed, and indeed re-confirmed, that the Samsung GX20’s RAW files are rendered quite nicely with the supplied software (Samsung RAW Converter 2.0). But with my second testing of this I took it a stage further and developed a JPEG from the RAW file (full size, 100% quality) then inspected the resulting image not in my normal “quick and dirty” image browser (XNView - which actually doesn’t do any favours to pictures whatsoever) or even in Lightroom, but with Samsung’s own Samsung Master (their JPEG-editing app).

Yep. It’ll do for me. I have still to do some extensive testing under a variety of more rigorous lighting conditions of course, but I don’t really anticipate any major problems at all now.
Checking for a second opinion with the oracle whom I’d consulted previously, he suspected (though was by no means certain) there is still a hint of a magenta boost, but nothing especially significant.

By now feeling a bit more positive and adventurous, thought I’d try something else (being careful not to get too carried away of course).

As the Samsung RAW Converter has virtually sorted out the colour problem with the GX20, what about the GX10 I wondered?
Possibly having mentioned it once or twice here on the blog, but definitely having referred to it a few times on my Flickr photostream, shots from the GX10 have nearly always seemed to exhibit a somewhat blueish tone. Although I’ve been aware of it, and have occasionally sought to minimise it, the imbalance has never really bothered me as it tends (in my opinion anyway) to give the pics a rather “clean” attractive quality. But its niggled away in the back of my mind that its not quite as accurate a rendition as I’d like.

Thus, call up a few RAWs from the GX10 in the converter and, whaddya know? The blue’s gone! Sorted!

But this is where I start getting a bit silly.

So if the Samsung converter works pretty well with the Samsung files (no… I don’t, repeat don’t, want to hear anyone mutter “Well, that’s obvious isn’t it, you plonker!” Remember, I’m a self-confessed idiot) then how would the Canon converter (Digital Photo Professional) work with files from the 400D?
Would it, for example, eliminate that irritating yellowish tint that seems to bedevil a lot of the shots from the camera?
Clearly I was riding the crest of a wave here for the answer, in short, is yes it does!

(Oh… and somewhere along the way I had to make sure that all the relevant apps were reading the right colour profile for my machine. Not the default one but the one generated by my colour calibration thingy.)

However, all of these really great, really positive developments have created something of a dilemma for me. Moreover, a dilemma that I find curiously depressing. Not suicidally depressing admittedly (not yet, anyway), but a sort of “oh bugger” type depressing.

At the very heart of my methodology in dealing with pics (from camera right through processing to uploading to the web, and indeed archiving etc) is the rather delightful Adobe Lightroom.
All the fault of my mate of course. He’d sung its praises as a super general-purpose workhorse for dealing with RAW files.

Er… wait a mo’ though. This was the same “mate” that finally persuaded me to try working in RAW instead of JPEG in the first place. Dammit! That should have been warning enough for me. I dunno, some people just never learn.

Anyway, Adobe Lightroom. It is a super app. The first problem I had with it (and the one that delayed my embracing it fully for a good coupla months) was the interface. Its a bit complex. Not to put too fine a point on it, I couldn’t get my head around it at all. Nothing was where I expected it to be (in fact, I’m still discovering features I never knew it had!), and what I could see in terms of controls and suchlike often didn’t do what I thought they would, but something else entirely. Disconcerting, to say the least!

Naturally I rarely read any help files or manuals. That’s far too much like hard work for me. If the hands-on approach don’t crack it then it ain’t worth bothering with… that’s my philosophy.

I vividly remember my first try-out of it (and this was even before I’d started properly working in RAW (tried it thanks to mate’s badgering, too intimidating, gave up), so was simply doing an edit of a JPEG). Having made the desired changes to the pic, the next obvious step was to do a “Save as”… cos obviously I didn’t want to overwrite the original.
So I looked for the “Save as” button, or link, or something. And looked. And looked.

Weird. There isn’t one. Yet my mate had clearly said (frequently, in a boringly repetitive way) that one of Lightroom’s strong points was its non-destructive editing feature. So it has to offer some sort of a “Save as” option, surely? Perhaps, thinks I, I need to close the program and it’ll pop up a little dialog asking me if I want to save the work, and if so, what as.

So I close the program. No, it doesn’t. And bang goes a fair bit of work. Sod it! That took me back to my very early days in computing when 20Mb (yes, that’s megabytes!) was considered a huge hard drive, and I… no… that’s a story for another day.
(That’s not strictly true actually. The “bang goes a fair bit of work” statement, that is. For I subsequently discovered that Lightroom edits “persist” until one selects the “reset” option for the relevant image/s.)

Anyway, after the obligatory wailing, gnashing of teeth and beating of breast (cos I didn’t know about the “persistence” feature at the time), some head-scratching. Then open the program again and hunt for the “Save as” control. Don’t find it. Sit back, have a think. Then another hunt. Then close the program in disgust. Leave it for a coupla weeks whilst I have a good old sulk.

But eventually irritation gets the better of me. At computers (damn stupid things); at Lightroom (damn stupid program); at my mate (damn stupid… well, perhaps not); at Life in general. So I fire off a quick (and, now I come to think of it, rather pleading) email to him, suggesting that a little bit of guidance in the highly complex task of saving an edit wouldn’t go amiss.

So he, ever patient (knows me too well, obviously), explains.

That button, that big one, the second of those two big buttons down on the left-hand side, the first clearly marked “Import”, the second clearly marked “Export”. Well, try clicking the Export button.

Oh yes. Of course. Blindingly obvious, isn’t it? Duh.

What made the entire episode even more infuriating is that in my saner moments (rare though they may be) I like to consider myself something of a computer geek. I play with them. I work with them. And when I’ve finished working with them, I play with them again. Have done for years. And years. And years.
But see a big button with “Export” marked on it and interpret that as being a “Save as” option? Not a chance. Think I should just pack in all this computer lark here and now.

Having overcome that first major hurdle I began to take to Lightroom like a duck to water.
Twiddle this, slide that, click something or other else. The features are marvellous (and I still haven’t sussed, and probably even discovered, all of them), plus some real snazzy ones that I’ve been unable to find on any other photo-editing prog.
I like the way it works. I like the subtlety and quality of the changes you can make with it. I even like (once I got used to it) the interface! Then I started working with RAW files and wow! The program really comes into its own. Such that its become my photo-editing program of choice. In fact, the only one I ever use… until now, that is.

Criticisms? Yeah, two (until just recently I only had one of course).
First, its use of system resources. Adobe recommends a minimum 1Gb RAM. And the machine I do my photo work on only has 512Mb! Ok, Lightroom runs, and if working with JPEGs there’s no real problem. But RAW files can be another matter entirely.
When working with those from the Canon it wasn’t too bad (though I had to slow down my workflow just a little bit). The GX10 presented somewhat more of a problem with its larger file sizes, and many was the time the machine would just drag its heels or the program would freeze on me until I learned a coupla tricks to overcome the bottlenecks. But files from the GX20? Well, the only way to return to comfortable working would be to increase the RAM. That’s if I continue to use Lightroom of course.

Now in fairness I can’t really say that’s a criticism of the program per se. After all, resource-hungriness isn’t unique to that app… most notable offender being Microsucks themselves of course.

And the second criticism is this most recent discovery… that Lightroom doesn’t support all RAW files equally!
Adobe themselves say…

“The camera raw functionality in Adobe® Photoshop® software provides fast and easy access within Photoshop to the “raw” image formats produced by many leading professional and midrange digital cameras. By working with these “digital negatives,” you can achieve the results you want with greater artistic control and flexibility while still maintaining the original “raw” files.”

They go on to say…

“The Photoshop Camera Raw plug-in (2.3 or higher) now also supports raw files in the DNG format. Find out more about the benefits of the Digital Negative, a publicly documented raw file format recently announced by Adobe.”

At this point I should perhaps explain that Samsung’s RAW files are in the DNG format.
For anyone unfamiliar with this, here (again) is what Adobe themselves (who came up with the format!) have to say about it…

“Raw file formats are becoming extremely popular in digital photography workflows because they offer creative professionals greater creative control. However, cameras can use many different raw formats — the specifications for which are not publicly available — which means that not every raw file can be read by a variety of software applications. As a result, the use of these proprietary raw files as a long-term archival solution carries risk, and sharing these files across complex workflows is even more challenging.

The solution to this growing problem? The Digital Negative (DNG), a publicly available archival format for the raw files generated by digital cameras. By addressing the lack of an open standard for the raw files created by individual camera models, DNG helps ensure that photographers will be able to access their files in the future.”

And finally Adobe, on their own website, specifically list the RAW files produced by both the Samsung GX10 and the GX20 as being supported by Lightroom!

(Quotes from the Adobe Lightroom website apart from the latter which is quoted from www.adobe.com/products/dng/)

I suppose in fairness I have to acknowledge that Lightroom does support the Samsung files, but only in the sense that it will actually read them and translate the data into recognisably an image. But as for rendering it correctly, well, forget it.

Which means I’ve now, finally, come to the source of my “oh bugger” type depression.

For what all this means is that there’s now a high probability that in future I shall have to change my working methodology insofar as using each manufacturer’s proprietary apps for processing pics from both the Samsungs and the Canon.
Doesn’t mean that I shall abandon Lightroom entirely of course. Oh no. I like it far too much for that. It’ll always come in handy as a prog for emergency fixes, or for working with JPEGs, or possibly even (as my mate suggested) working with tiffs (but only when I’ve upgraded the RAM, cos tiff files are bloody huge!).

Well, I think that’s about it for the mo’. And for someone who started off with having “not really a lot to add” I think I’ve probably excelled myself!

There were three issues that concerned me… under-exposure, loss of detail/resolution, and an inaccurate colour-cast.
There’s also the matter of the large file sizes. Though that’s not really an issue… more of an inconvenience that’ll no longer be a problem once I’ve increased the RAM on my computer.

Taking them in order then:

Under-exposure

This could well be a lens issue and as such I’m not letting myself get too concerned by it until after I’ve tried some shots with a different lens. Its also conceivable that in part its a side-effect of the colour-balance issue, though I doubt it. In any event its fairly easily remedied, either pre- or post- shot, so can hardly be called an “issue” so much as a “quirk”.

Loss of Detail

This was of much greater concern, and the source of much of my initial disappointment.
Of course, this too could have been a lens issue, but equally as well may not have been. And if not, then not so easily remedied. In fact, if a sensor- or processor-related problem then I doubt if it could be remedied at all short of a firmware upgrade maybe. Hence my concern.

However, that impression was formed on the basis of the dozen or so pics I shot with the camera virtually straight out the box (just couldn’t wait, could I?) and conceivably I hadn’t paid quite as much attention either to the settings or in actually taking the shots as I should have done.
And when I inspected the track and river shots I’d done, aside from the persistent colour issue I was much more satisfied.

I subsequently sent one of the RAW files from the river set to a mate for closer scrutiny by a much more experienced eye than mine, and his opinion was, to quote “the GX20 has sort of a clarity that is intriguing, its the detail in the images that is clear and the file looks neat in appearance, think if the white balance is sussed it will be bloody good too”, which really does sum it up quite nicely.
And that’s with the bog-standard lens that came with the camera!

So I think the “loss of detail issue” isn’t an issue after all and can be confidently forgotten.

But there still remains…

Colour Cast

This is clearly a white balance problem and, after looking closely at all the shots, plus taking on board the various comments made about the pics I’d posted to Flickr (which drew attention to either a pink or a purple tone in the shots) I began to suspect (and eventually confirmed to my satisfaction) a problem with the magenta.

With a lot of tinkering in post-processing its possible that the colour can be corrected, but that would inevitably entail a helluva lot of work on each individual image just in getting them to look as they should look. And I’m not at all convinced that configuring a camera-specific preset in Lightroom (my RAW editing app of choice) to do all this work on image import would necessarily be effective for every image taken under a wide range of circumstances.
Now I’m not totally opposed to enhancing a particular colour or manipulating the colour balance at post-processing stage, providing I’m starting out with an image that provides a fairly accurate colour balance! Absent that and one is no longer looking at an artistic interpretation (hmm… please forget I just used the word “artistic”. Don’t know what came over me for a moment there!) but at a flawed image. Not good!

Curiously, this matter of colour balance also seems to be exhibited by the other cameras (blue with the GX10, yellow with the 400D), but nowhere near to the same extent and not with every shot. In other words, the anomalies are at a reasonably acceptable level, and not every pic merits tweaking.

However, it was suggested to me that maybe the problem’s not with the camera itself but with the way its writing RAW files, especially if the version of firmware its using to do this is different to that of the GX10 (which it is).
So two ideas came out of this… either use the RAW conversion software that comes with the camera (which I don’t), or make sure I’ve got the latest stable version of Lightroom (which I hadn’t).

Now, I’ve got the RAW converter app that came with the GX10 installed though I never use it, preferring instead to use Lightroom. So I’d not bothered to install the later version with the GX20, not even having considered using it.
However, I uninstalled the GX10 version then installed the later version… and whaddya know? The shots look fine! (Curiously, they also load a damn sight quicker than with Lightroom.) Not even a hint of colour imbalance.

Feeling a tad more optimistic, I set to thinking… So if its the way the data’s being read as opposed to a flaw in the camera itself (or indeed in its settings), then maybe upgrading to the latest version of Lightroom might render a similar result.
And that’s what I did.

Hmm. Well, Lightroom continued to render the files with a magenta tone bias in the white balance (confirming my original diagnosis at least)… but this time showing that in the control panel as a +10 increase. Which it hadn’t been doing before… or at least, not that I’d noticed.
Knocking that +10 off (to effective 0) I exported some test JPEGs. They were definitely an improvement but, alas, not quite enough. However, this does suggest that if I want to persist in using Lightroom for processing the GX20 files (which is my preferred option) then at least I can overcome the problem relatively easily simply by setting the tone slider for that colour spectrum in the opposite direction.

Whoopee!

But another couple of possibilities emerge from this.

It looks as though, if I use the Samsung-supplied RAW converter I may well be able to see the files rendered as they should without any additional tweaking on my part. And if that’s the case, that further suggests that processing done in-camera will probably be okay, meaning that JPEGs should come straight off-camera fine.

Which of course needs testing. And if that’s the case, then maybe I could use the GX20 principally for shooting JPEGs, reverting to RAW only on really critical shots or where I anticipate a lot of post-processing. (In other words, use it as my main “events” camera.)

Now this may seem a bit of a bizarre approach for using a dSLR, but it does actually have certain merits.
For example, when I did the Carnival Against the Arms Trade shoot in Brighton earlier this year the folk down there were eager to grab some pics urgently (practically straight off-camera) in order to send out to various media (who were squawking for photos) in virtual real-time.
Yet that presented horrendous problems as they simply weren’t geared up to handle RAWs, and neither did they, or I, have the right connector to simply process in-camera and then plug the GX10 into their computer. Nor, weirdly, did they have a card-reader on hand (neither, stupidly, did I!). We came up with a work-around eventually but by that time they’d grabbed initial shots from someone else so I missed out on what could have been a really super opportunity.

Shooting in JPEG (plus carrying a card-reader of course!) would have sorted that problem. In fact, the problem would never have arisen.

(Memo to self… in future be sure to carry a card reader and PC connection cables for both cameras whenever attending an event. I don’t call myself an idiot for nothing y’know!)

Then there’s the matter of the file sizes. Were I to shoot principally in JPEG I wouldn’t have to invest in a lot of new high-capacity cards, nor would I be stretching computer resources to their limits if/when importing the files into Lightroom.

At best this is only a partial solution for it’d only really be relevant to my “events stuff”. Where my “scenic” shots are concerned I think I’d still want to shoot RAW, preferring the much greater flexibility in processing, and quality-retention, that such allows.

Nevertheless, things are looking a lot more hopeful now.

In conclusion then, I have to ask myself how I feel about the camera now.
I won’t claim to be ecstatic. And I’m still mildly disappointed by not having experienced that joy of playing with a new toy that I feel I should have experienced. In that sense, I feel somewhat cheated.

But at least now I don’t have the inclination to chuck the bloody thing straight back to the place from whence it came. In fact, if my mate’s assessment bears out, then the thing will prove to have been a worthwhile acquisition.
And you can be assured, now I’ve started this particular topic I’ll be posting news of later developments.

Well, that’ll be something to look forward to, now won’t it? (Heh heh)

Wednesday morning, 16 July. Up with the lark (well, before the lark actually… even before the sunrise in fact), having had about four hours’ sleep.

Why?

Cos I needed to jump on a train to get me down to London real early, almost before the metropolis begins to wake up.

Why?

Cos a bunch of folk calling themselves the Greenwash Guerillas (don’t you just love that name) are staging a demonstration outside the Business Design Centre at the ridiculously early hour of 0815. And of course, me being me, I need to get down there much earlier to a) find the damned place (allowing for my well-earned reputation of being able to get lost even on a one-way street!), and then b) having found the place do a recce with the principal intention of sussing out where both the coffeeshops and toilets are.

Why (the demo, that is)?

Well, this Business Design Centre place is apparently hosting a so-called “Climate Change Summit”, and the delegates thereto really do need to be informed that the “Summit” is being sponsored by e.on, a company entrenched in the power industry. Tha same company in fact that has plans to build the first new coal-fired power station in the UK for thirty years at Kingsnorth, in Kent.
(You can read more about it all here!)

And of course photographs of the event are simply begging to be taken, even at that time of the morning.
And with the forecast being for rain!

I must be mad!

As it turned out, the rain held off. In fact, once the event got under way the sun started peeking through just as though Life, the Universe and Everything were giving its blessing to the Guerillas’ cause.
Didn’t take the new camera with me (the GX20) cos I haven’t quite sorted out the white balance issue (though current thinking is that its nothing to do with the camera per se but rather the way my existing apps are reading the RAW data). So the trusty GX10 came with me instead… along with the 400D of course.

Shot a couple of cards’ full of pics, then back home by just after midday to steam into the sorting/processing/uploading and get them online as quick as pos, plus letting relevant interested parties know of course.
But had to interrupt that to get to back into town during the evening (a spin-off from which was yet more urgent stuff to be done soon as I returned home!) then finally resume messing around with the day’s pics.

(You can see the full set here)

And after all that, turn my mind (and hands, and computer and stuff) to the thorny issue of the GX20’s white balance.
Which, between installing new progs (or rather, updated versions of existing progs), a load of testing, and exchanging a flurry of emails with a knowledgeable mate, now seems well on the way to getting sorted.

So, some 27 hours after I first surfaced I finally managed to get a top-up of that four hours’ sleep I’d had before the fun and games started.

I definitely must be mad!

Clearly there’s some sort of colour issue going on with the GX20, as was revealed by yesterday’s “play shots”.

Well, nothing like the present for starting to tackle this issue, so went out early this morning (bright and sunny) to do a few test shots, concentrating for the purposes of this particular session on the “colour tone” feature of the camera.

I took each shot nine times, corresponding to the available presets in the colour tone setting… standard, red, magenta, blue, cyan, green, yellow, warm, and cool.

However, to avoid totally boring visitors to my Flickr page I’ve only uploaded the first of each series (the “standard” or default colour tone setting).

Other relevant info…

White Balance at the “daylight” setting
Auto ISO
Aperture Priority mode
AdobeRGB colourspace
RAW format

In the pre-shoot “Picture Wizard” settings Saturation was set to +1, Contrast 0 and Sharpness +1

(Theoretically of course when shooting in RAW mode settings such as White Balance, Contrast, Saturation and Sharpness aren’t actually applied to the image, although the information’s saved for when the file’s converted to JPEG (which isn’r strictly true re the white balance… as I discovered on a shoot a few weeks back!). This raises the interesting question of whether or not Lightroom actually reads this data or should one in fact just use the Samsung Raw Converter program that comes with the camera? I sense more experimentation afoot.)

Imported the shots into Lightroom then, with no post processing whatsoever, exported to JPEG at reduced size for web useage (but at 100% quality), also converting to sRGB colourspace.

Comments/observations invited.

(One positive thing that did emerge from this session was that my concerns re detail resolution have been somewhat laid to rest… for the moment!)

And here are exactly the same shots, but “tweaked” (post-processed). Basically upped the exposure a tad and increased the vibrancy quite substantially…

Following on from my last post…

Well, having just come into possession of a new camera I simply couldn’t resist having a play prior to taking it out “for real”. Who could?

And, as is fairly usual with me, optimism thrust common sense aside even before I’d switched the damn thing on. So, a few shots indoors then, a day or so later, wander outside and fire off a few shots; then scurry back indoors to quickly transfer them to the computer so that I could become ecstatic over the truly wonderful results.

My first impressions?

Hmm.

I say again, hmm. (Not even an exclamation mark, you’ll notice!)

Well, I’ve gotta be brutally honest and confess that first impressions were somewhat less than favourable. But I also have to be sensible about this, put aside my initial disappointment, and admit that after a rational analysis of the results the camera itself is a reasonably significant improvement over its forerunner, the GX10.

To explain…

Firstly, the RAW files are absolutely huge. To give you a rough idea, the Canon’s come out at an average of about 11/12Mb, the GX10’s at an average of about 16/17Mb… but this beast is consistently producing files of around 24Mb!

Now bearing in mind that on the present laptop I’m using to process pics it struggles when importing the GX10’s files into Lightroom, all I can say is that these massive 24Mb files had my machine whimpering, cringeing, and begging for mercy.
It was a struggle just to get them loaded into Lightroom, and I eventually had to resort to importing them one at a time!

So, before even looking at the results, my opinion was already somewhat jaundiced.

Anyway, having (finally) overcome that hurdle, things began to start looking up. At the thumbnail stage anyway.
There was little evidence of the vignetting that so afflicts shots taken with the GX10 (though that’s actually a lens issue), and that consistently blueish cast I seem to get with the GX10 has disappeared. In fact, the overall colour balance seemed to be a much more accurate representation than I’ve ever achieved straight off-camera from the GX10, or for that matter from the Canon. I’d fired all the shots in this initial batch with the camera set to auto white balance and auto ISO and, though I tweaked the wb slightly in post-processing, that was literally a tweak rather than a major edit.
That said, all the shots seemed to require significantly more “vibrancy” and “saturation” than I’ve been accustomed to applying… which may simply be evidence that the AdobeRGB colourspace I select as default is actually being applied more effectively.

Which suggests that the new processor has an impact other than on just the JPEGS… and a positive one at that. Excellent!

But then I looked at the images in larger size and rapidly the suspicion formed in my mind that detail resolution is nowhere near as good as with the GX10. This was majorly disappointing cos, with 14.6megapixels I was expecting much greater detail resolution. I could be mistaken of course and clearly need a more extensive session with a wider range of subjects to verify this or not, as the case may be. In any event, that’s more likely to be another lens issue. (I’ll probably have a go at trying the lens from the GX10 on the camera and see what results I get from that; which should, at the very least, clarify things a bit.)

Well, that’s about it for the mo’.

I’m not as excited by the results as I thought I would have been, or feel I should have been… but rationality dictates that the issues disturbing me are not actually the fault of the camera at all but of the computer (the file size/importing/processing time issue) and the lens (the detail resolution issue).

So, I need a computer with significantly more RAM and a different/better lens before I can really make a definitive assessment.

Bugger!

This here is my photography-kit shopping list, with priorities being pretty much as listed (though there’s no guarantee I’ll stick rigidly to that order!).

Actually, that’s not strictly true. That its a shopping list. I’ve been saving for ages now and still seem little closer to even getting the very first item, on which basis it’ll probably take me about twenty thousand years before I’ve got the whole lot. If I ever do, that is. And that’s assuming I add nothing else to it!
So perhaps it’d be more accurate to describe it as a wish list. A secret fantasy if you will. Sad really, cos its not even very ambitious. And what sort of person is it that has fantasies about camera kit anyway? Oh, what depths to which I have sunk!

Anyway, here goes…

1. A better walkabout lens to replace the kit one for the GX10… at the moment I’ve got my sights set on a Sigma

2. A proper macro lens (for the rest, ditto above)

2. A bigger shoulder bag (the backpack I’ve got isn’t always the best or most appropriate thing to use, and my existing shoulder bag is just a tad too small for two cameras with lenses attached). I have in mind something in the Lowepro Stealth Reporter range

3. A RAW-capable point & shoot… the Canon G9’s still the front-runner for this, though apparently there are rumours that Nikon are about to introduce one as well (the P6000 I think), so my mind could be changed fairly easily (as it very frequently is!)

4. A decent flash for at least the GX10, and possibly one for the 400D

5. A decent and easily portable tripod to slot in between the monster Slik and the real cheapie lightweights I’ve got… something from the Manfrotto range looks fave

And then, in about a million years’ time…

6. A Nikon D300 or similar

(But we won’t even talk about the latter cos I dread to think what actually getting one would entail… loads more highly expensive glass for a start… that wouldn’t fit anything else I’ve got! Er… so what’s new?)

The list being perodically interrupted of course by all the other odd little bits and pieces (memory cards, batteries, filters, spare lens caps, pouches etc etc) that one seems to accumulate without really knowing how, or even why occasionally… somehow they just manage to slip themselves into the shopping from time to time.

Now nowhere in that list is there any mention of upgrading the dSLR camera bodies I’ve already got.

Well, is there?

Nope! I thought not. So how come I mysteriously, suddenly, and quite unexpectedly seem to have acquired an example of the latest Samsung GX20?

As some of you (well, one of you at least) will already know, I’ve been having a bit of a love affair with the Samsung GX10 (basically a re-branded and slightly customised version of the Pentax K10D).
Ok, its got its little foibles. The supplied kit lens leaves something to be desired (though, strictly speaking, this isn’t part of the camera per se); the OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation) switch is cleverly in exactly the wrong place, making it peculiarly vulnerable to being inadvertently knocked into the “off” position; the fact that no matter how much you tweak the white balance the pics always seem to determinedly end up with a bit of a blueish cast; the function button and circular controller on the rear of the body seem perversely over-sensitive, so that the slightest tap (as when, for example, slung around the neck the rear of the camera bounces against a jacket button, zip or whatever) can irritatingly reset the white balance or ISO etc for you. Not too serious… providing one notices. Which all too often I don’t! And hence end up with loads of crap pics! (That’s my excuse, anyway.)

But hey, nothing’s perfect. And even allowing those little quirks I still rate the camera… they could even be considered as a feature, giving it a character uniquely of its own! Regardless, I still think its far superior to my Canon, and there’s something about the way it processes pics that I just adore.
And its chunky. You feel like you’re holding something substantial; something that’ll stand up to a bit of rough and tumble. Not a cheap bit of plastic that’ll likely stop working at the first slightest bump.
I’d happily trade the Canon in for a Nikon. But the Samsung? Hmm… probably not. You get the idea.

I’ve had the GX10 getting on for nine months now (or thereabouts). Got it in fact not too long after it was first introduced into the UK market. And I’m still happy with it. In fact, the more I use it the happier I become with it, and the more features I discover how to use (of which there are a plethora… many of them I still haven’t yet played with). Its one of those bits of kit that actually seems to work with you rather than just presenting one frustration after another. It almost actively encourages you to want to try taking better pics, and to experiment… to play, and have fun.

But we live in a consumerist-driven society, and camera manufacturers appear just as committed as any other industry to capitalising on this.
Long gone are the days when you could buy a piece of hardware and confidently expect it still to be in service in 15 or 20 years’ time. Still functioning; still maintainable in terms of parts replacements; and, more to the point, not having been replaced by an “updated” model or version!
This is the blight by which virtually all industries nowadays seem afflicted.
A new model range, distinguished by little other than a different and often confusing “model number”; or a new colour range or other purely cosmetic change; the inclusion of one or two new “features” that are so often little more than unnecessary gimmicks, all too frequently masquerading as “new” or “the latest” technology. And so it goes on. Which of course necessarily entails the inevitable price-hike.

With little intention other than to put yet another dividend into the pockets of the manufacturers’ shareholders at the expense of us, the poor (and daily getting poorer) weak-willed victims of the marketing Machiavellis.
Which is to say nothing of the impact on the environment of churning out all this extra, and largely superfluous, “stuff”. All in the name of the great god “Profit”… which ain’t much use to a species that could well be on the verge of extinction!

So Samsung, just a couple of years or so after announcing the GX10, have introduced a “new”, “upgraded” model… their now current dSLR flagship the GX20!
Far as I can tell, the differences are few and unlikely to cause that much excitement…

An increase in the ISO range from 100-1600 to 100-3200, with an option to configure it up to 6400… accompanied by the warning that selecting such may result in increased noise (what a surprise!).

An increase in megapixels from 10.2 to 14.6 - a dubious blessing at best (and a change in sensor size from 23.5 x 15.7mm to 23.4 x 15.5mm. Hmm).

A new processor, said to have been developed jointly by Samsung and Pentax which, as far as I’ve been able to learn, only affects performance in the JPEG-processing area. Though I could be wrong. But if I’m not, then presumably this is practically irrelevant to someone (such as myself) who shoots only in RAW.

And the inclusion of “Live View”. Yes. Well. The less I say about that the better probably. Um… with an LCD increased from 2.5″ to 2.7″.

Finally, the body-weight’s increased from 793 to 806gm (including memory card and battery).

And that’s it! Oh… nearly forgot… a re-branded kit lens that looks virtually identical (apart from the name badge) to the one that came with the GX10. That one had Schneider-Kreuznach on it, the GX20’s is allegedly Samsung’s own. It’ll be interesting to discover whether the difference is purely in the naming, or if they’ve managed to sort out the vignetting problem as well.
But, at the end of the day, its still just a kit lens so one can’t complain too much.

Hmm… there’s another “Oh, I nearly forgot” item… the manual’s now printed landscape instead of portrait. Whoopee!

Not much really then to warrant replacing the GX10, and absolutely no valid reason to even consider laying hands on yet another dSLR at the moment. Particularly without the one feature that I think would have represented a real value-for-money improvement… upping the burst mode from 3 to 6fps or thereabouts.

Except, and unfortunately, in certain areas (notably and currently that of camera kit) I’m as prone to the temptations of consumerism as anyone else. Dammit!

So, as I said (seemingly ages ago), it seems I’ve mysteriously and quite suddenly acquired one of these GX20s.

I can of course justify it… sort of (actually a fabricated rationalisation for my shameful consumerist lifestyle, but there’s no need to mention that!).
It now means I’ve got a backup in the event that my camera gets lost, stolen, or (likeliest scenario) confiscated/trashed by the cops at any one of the protests or other such events I cover.

Whether the GX20 will actually assist me in taking better pics is of course another matter entirely, and remains to be seen. But if it doesn’t I suspect I shall be more than a little miffed. Yet, bizarrely, I can’t think of one real good reason why it should!

* By way of explanation: the title of this post is “Psst… whatever you do don’t tell forkboy!”. For those visitors unfamiliar with my ramblings I should perhaps explain that the “forkboy” therein refers to a particular person who otherwise would remain nameless who has no greater joy than honing his wit on my occasional (and rare) acquisitions of camera gear. Hence the appeal to please not to tell this particular person about my coming into possession of the GX20. Please! Else I shall just fall victim to a torrent of sarcy remarks. And he’s a fine one to talk… what with his huge lenses, and huge mansion to match!

As a general rule I don’t like doing “indoors shots” at home… mainly cos lighting’s usually a bitch, and very few things there jump out and shout “photograph me”.

The first issue I’ve sort of overcome by my fairly extensive experimentation at The Bear pub where the lighting conditions are, to say the very least, “interesting”!
But the second issue… ah, that’s a different matter entirely. Familiarity is of course the cause of the problem, so the solution obviously is to try to see things “as with a stranger’s eyes”. Hmm.

Ages ago a mate of mine suggested that its a good exercise to occasionally try shooting things different to one’s “normal” pics, for all sorts of very good reasons.

Then, not so very long ago, an internet photo buddy of mine shot a rather delightful series of wine bottles and suchlike.
Well, this (coupled with that ages-old suggestion that’s always been lurking in the back of my mind) set me to thinking.

And what I ended up with was this short series of shots around the theme “In the Kitchen”!

Now these are doubly interesting for a certain person who shall remain nameless has occasionally passed the odd comment here and there implying that I’m somewhat secretive about my abode (bloody cheek!).
Well, having shot this little series I decided to create a brand new Flickr set, “Around the Home”, and include therein the odd one or two relevant shots I may have taken in the past.
Lo and behold, it seems I’ve actually done quite a few (so much for those rumours of “secretiveness”!). You can see the complete set here.