The Digital Experience
Sixteen months ago, I purchased my first digital SLR – the EOS 20D. I had resisted the temptation to jump onto the digital bandwagon for reasons related to cost and handling. Until the EOS 20D came along, going digital meant sacrificing speed and performance compared to even a mid-range film body. The specification of the EOS 20D promised much, and as an EOS 3 user, I didn’t want to return to life in the slow lane. How has the digital experience matched expectation?
Expectations
Build quality - With a magnesium alloy chassis, a good solid camera was expected, though without the bomb-proof characteristics and weight of the pro models.
Good handling - Good start-up time, good autofocus and fine-tuned metering. Convenient controls. Fuss-free, logical menus for the camera settings.
Flexibility - Going digital meant the flexibility of seeing the shot immediately after capture and being able to alter the ISO from shot to shot if required.
Good battery life - No endless recharging of batteries. They need to last for hundreds of shots.
Image quality - Low noise, lots of detail, accurate colours.
The EOS 20D - Its key features
Let’s take a look at the key features of this camera and assess some of its key features.
Ergonomics - I like the 20D. It’s solid and feels good to hold. My small hands can easily reach the controls when I want them. The buttons in front of the top LCD have dual functions, the first is accessed by the main input dial by the shutter, and the second via the quick control dial on the rear. Yes, I have twiddled the wrong dial and I suspect all will make the same mistake from time to time. It does save having an excessive number of buttons or key features hidden within the menu system. Given a choice, the latter option would frustrate me a lot more.
If I were to fault the camera, the viewfinder seems very small and dark compared to my film cameras, both of which had large viewfinders to accommodate the eye control focus point selection. The 20D has a smaller mirror, and this may be one reason for the viewfinder feeling so small and dark. The smaller viewfinder is a slight disadvantage as a spectacle wearer, but I have found that the shape of the spectacle lenses has a big influence on this. It’s more of an issue in portrait mode than in landscape.
Some have commented on the mode selector dial – no, it doesn’t feel as robust as you might expect on a semi-pro camera. However, it does the job and is easy to operate even with gloves on. The buttons on the camera are generally easy to operate and are friendly to glove-wearing photographers, though you will need to remove gloves to load batteries or change the CF card.
Metering - The EOS 20D uses a 35 segment metering system that has been featured in the EOS D30, EOS D60, EOS 10D and EOS 300D before it. The same metering pattern first appeared in the EOS 300 film camera, it was also used in the mid-range EOS 30 and 30V. It is a reasonably good system that is let down only when faced with strong backlighting. In the 20D, it continues to perform reasonably well, though the 20D does seem prone to underexposure.
The 20D lacks the spot metering and multi-spot metering. I have missed the spot metering on odd occasions, but not dramatically so. The partial metering does the job most of the time. Only when photographing subjects against a light background do I wish for that spot metering.
Autofocus - The nine-point autofocus system on the 20D is excellent. I consider it an improvement over the seven-point system in my EOS 30. The spread of points in the diamond shape is very useful indeed. The system is responsive and works very well. It rarely struggles to focus except in very low light/low contrast conditions. This is influenced by the lens used, add a fast wide aperture lens and this camera is superb. The manual selection of the focus point takes getting used to after a number of years using the eye control feature on the EOS 30 and EOS 3, but I admit that I often have either automatic selection or the central point selected. The nine autofocus points do not cover as wide an area as the 45 point system on the EOS 3. However, having used the camera for some time, I have not found this to be a major handicap. It’s worth getting accustomed with that eight-way control on the back of the camera.
If you’ve previously used an EOS 3 or 1V and have been used to being able to use a 1.4x extender on the EF 100-400 LIS zoom and retain autofocus, you will be disappointed that the 20D can only focus down to a maximum aperture of f/5.6. In its defence, I will say that the autofocus at f/8 is only useful in bright lighting conditions, and the crop factor means that I have never missed being able to use the extender.
Shutter noise - Many folks berated the shutter noise on the EOS 20D after its launch. True, it’s not as whisper quiet as the 10D or its film equivalents. The 20D has a beefed up shutter mechanism to cope with shutter-happy digital photographers. It is not as loud as the EOS 3 by any means. I have taken photos with the 20D in lots of different places and shutter noise is not a problem. It’s the price we pay for demanding extra durability.
The 20D uses the same type of remote release as the EOS 3, so it is compatible with the timer remote and the RS-80N3. The socket is located behind one of the rubber covers on the left side of the camera and is a little fiddly at first. The socket is also orientated differently to the EOS 3. Insert the connector with the cable pointing towards the rear of the camera.
White balance - If you shoot in raw mode, the white balance isn’t important as it can be changed after the event. If you shoot in JPEG mode – the auto white balance gets it right most of the time, but not always and the tungsten setting gives results that are too warm. Sometimes it is worth taking some test shots and using what gives you the result you like most for a given lighting situation.
Data handling - The 20D inherited the Digic II processor from the 1D MkII. The result is a camera that rarely freezes out because the buffer is full, especially if you shoot in JPEG mode. Put a fast CF card in the camera such as the Lexar 80x Pro series and files are written (and read) very swiftly indeed. I use only 1Gb Lexar 80x Pro cards in the camera. I have four in total, with a Flashtrax for downloading should the need arise. To date, that has been more than adequate.
The camera has been connected to the PC only twice. Using a card reader is far more convenient than messing around with cables.
The ultimate test
The ultimate test for any camera is the image quality. It can have the fastest handling or the fastest autofocus in the world, but if the image quality isn’t up to scratch, it’s an expensive ornament. The image quality from the 20D is excellent. Since the purchase, all the zoom lenses have been upgraded to L series glass and one can tell the difference. The camera has been used in a wide variety of situations and has performed well throughout. Images have plenty of detail and accurate colours too.
Battery life hasn’t proved to be an issue even when used with image stabilised lenses, or in cold weather. I have two spare batteries and that is more than adequate. The camera has been a pleasure to own.
The software that Canon bundled with the EOS 20D has taken a lot of criticism. The EOS Viewer Utility has now been discontinued. Digital Photo Professional is now at Version 2.03 and the later version has improved much on the original one that came bundled with the camera. However, two raw conversion options are the tools of choice:
The future of slide film?
It is the huge success of digital photography that has led to fears that traditional methods could begin to die out. These fears have intensified following announcements from both Dixons and Kodak that they are to stop selling 35mm cameras. The BBC have also begun mourning the 'demise' of the 35mm camera, even going so far as to run an obituary for the format on its website! These announcements have raised questions about what the future of film photography will look like if 35mm cameras continue to decline. Is it really possible that the popularity of digital photography could bring about the death of slide film? Heather Turner looks for some answers.
But before we attempt to predict the future for slide film, let's take a quick look into its past. The first slide film was launched by Kodak, who in 1935 introduced the Kodachrome ISO 10 slide film. Since then, numerous other slide films have been introduced through various manufacturers, although the Kodachrome range remained one of the most popular. It wasn't until 1990 that Kodachrome found its first serious competition, following Fuji's launch of Velvia, a 17 layer slide film. Velvia quickly became a hugely popular slide film, and its sharpness and vivid colour reproduction soon helped to make it the film of choice for both professional and enthusiast photographers.
Throughout its history, slide film has been known as the method which offers the best quality pictures for serious photographers, and it was rare to find a photography enthusiast who worked solely with print film. Slide film offers photographers sharp images and clear, bright colours, perfect for capturing vivid scenery and landscapes, and other subjects such as wildlife and sports photography.
However, since the introduction of the first digital cameras in 1990, photography has become a much broader market. The advancement in digital technologies is now providing more and more people with the capabilities to take good quality pictures, and to enhance shots post-capture using digital software. Though this wider interest in photography is generally a good thing, it does mean that good photography is no longer the sole territory of the talented enthusiasts and professional photographers. Therefore the manufacturers of photographic products now have to produce products which reflect the wider range of skills and abilities now using photographic equipment.
This is an area where digital photography comes into its own, and has an advantage over the area of traditional photography. Beginners at photography and people looking to develop their skills are attracted by the way in which digital photography allows you to enhance images post-capture, a feature that is not possible using traditional methods. This combined with the instantaneous results available with digital cameras is especially useful to the novice photographer, often allowing skills to develop much faster. Some people believe that digital photography makes us all better photographers. But is this really the case, and if so, just how much longer can slide film survive?
Many camera clubs throughout the UK have already begun to feel the effects of digital, noting that they are now struggling to gain significant numbers of entries in slide competitions. Robert Turner is Competition Secretary for the Worksop and District Photographic Society. A member of the club for 25 years, and himself a keen slide photographer, Robert has observed a significant change in the use of slide film during recent years. He said: "There are definitely less people entering slides in competitions than there used to be. Until recently, slide has always been one of our most popular competitions, whereas people submitting prints were in the minority."
He added: "These days most people are using digital cameras and making their own prints on their computers at home. Consequently, while entries into slide competitions have gone into decline, entries into the print section are now increasing."
It's not just camera clubs that are feeling the effects of the revolution in digital cameras. Both Kodak and Fujifilm have recently announced the discontinuance of two popular slide films. Kodak have discontinued Kodachrome 25, while Fujifilm have begun phasing out Velvia 50 - to be replaced by the previously only available in Japan Velvia 100. However Fujifilm deny that the reason that Velvia 50 will no longer be produced is a result of any market force, but is simply due to problems getting the emulsion which is needed to produce the film. Jenny Hodge, of Fujifilm, explained: "Some of the ingredients used in Velvia 50 are no longer available, and so that is why the film is being phased out. We still have enough stocks of Velvia 50 to last probably up until the end of the year."
Fujifilm believe that while there has undoubtedly been an increase in people using digital cameras there is no reason to suggest that slide film is a dying format. David Bell is Marketing Manager for Fujifilm Consumer Film Products. He said: "There is no clear evidence to suggest that there has been a fall in sales of slide film. While enthusiasts are playing with digital cameras they are also continuing to use slide film on occasions, or for certain types of photography."
Fujifilm's Jenny Hodge agreed that slide and digital photography was not necessarily an either/or situation, saying: "A lot of digital SLRs have hit the market, but we are finding that people are still using slide film a lot, often in conjunction with digital."
This sentiment is echoed by Jennie Wild at Kodak. Kodak's recent decision to stop selling 35mm cameras in Europe and the U.S prompted further fears over the future of slide film, but Jennie is quick to downplay fears that Kodak are to abandon the film market. She said: "The 35mm cameras that we were selling were generally for snapshooters, not slide film users. Slide film users typically tend to be advanced amateurs and professional photographers who own or shoot very high-end SLRs."
Jennie pointed out that Vivitar will continue to sell Kodak branded 35mm cameras in the U.S and throughout most EEC countries. Commenting on Kodak's decision to stop selling the cameras, Jennie said: "Kodak stopped selling 35mm cameras direct in Europe and the U.S in order to concentrate resources on growth opportunities. Kodak continue to sell 35mm cameras directly in areas where this is a growth product, such as Eastern Europe and parts of Asia."
Though some people may not have abandoned film photography just yet, choosing instead to split their loyalties between both digital and traditional methods for the time being, this is not enough for film photography to remain the growth product for manufacturers that it once was. It is an unfortunate fact that, though many manufacturers state that their film products are still selling well, sales of slide film have declined in recent times and the market that now exists for film photography is much smaller than in previous years.
According to figures from GFK, during the period of July 2004 until June 2005 colour slide film sold 875,000 units, and was responsible for making up just two per-cent of the overall market. During this period four million digital cameras were sold. This figure reflects sales of digital cameras alone, and does not account for sales of all the digital accessories and software packages that are now available. Commenting on the low percentage of slide film sales, GFK's Anthony Norman said: "Slide film is a very small part of the market now. In fact, sales of slide film now reflect only a tiny proportion of the overall market for photographic products."
The area of slide and digital photography seems to attract much conflicting opinion, as much from those in the photographic industry as from the enthusiasts arguing the merits of digital vs. film amongst themselves. Peter Brandon is Operations Director at WPS Media, who are responsible for Fujifilm Professional. He states that slide film is the one area of photography where digital photography is not having too much of an impact. He said: "The market for digital cameras has increased dramatically, but slide film is standing up well against it. Slide is one of the few areas where the popularity of digital photography is not having an adverse effect, mainly due to the fact that fans of slide film tend to be loyal to the format."
Peter states that Fujifilm Professional are extremely confident that the market for slide film will continue to prosper. So much so, in fact, that they even plan to introduce new films. This follows the success of the launch of the Velvia 100. "It was only released this year, but already the Velvia 100 has become a really good seller" says Peter.
Likewise Kodak are also confident that the market for slide film will remain strong, even as digital photography becomes more and more ingrained. Kodak's Jennie Wild said: "We believe that many advanced amateur and professional photographers will continue to use film SLRs, as well as digital. As a result, we expect to continue to manufacture a wide range of Colour Reversal slide films for the foreseeable future."
The future of slide film is difficult to predict. Though slide film tends to have a loyal fan base, digital converts are becoming more and more enamoured with their new method. Of course, there are reasons why people tend to prefer one or the other, each method having its own advantages and disadvantages. Robert Turner, of the Worksop and District Photographic Society, believes that one disadvantage of slide film is that is easily damaged. He said: "Many times slides come back from processing with scratches or dust on them, and if you cannot get it off or crop it successfully then it ruins the whole image. That is where the advantage of digital would be - you can easily remove areas that detract from the effect of an image."
Kodak's Jennie Wild observed that some people may prefer the look of film, especially when doing work which requires enlarging or printing. A common complaint is also that images produced on a digital camera, and then enhanced, look too 'clean'. Enhancements can sometimes make an image look too perfect and it loses any distinguishing characteristics.
At the moment digital photography does appear to be pulling ahead in the popularity stakes but there is still a significant band of enthusiast film users continuing to fly the flag for slide film. Worksop and District Photographic Society's Robert Turner believes slide film will still be around for a long time to come. He said: “I can't see slide film dying out completely, or at least not until the very distant future. There are still too many people who enjoy shooting with slide film, and some manufacturers are introducing film cameras which they will have to provide accessories for for another 20 years yet.”
In conclusion he added: “I think that eventually it will become a specialist area of photography, a niche market. But as long as manufacturers keep producing slide film there will always be people out there who will want to buy it.”
Only time will tell whether digital photography will really bring about the total demise of slide film. Until then let's just enjoy having the freedom to choose how we want to take our photographs. All anyone really wants is the ability to take the best photographs possible and the more ways to achieve this the better.
Confidence is something I wasn't short of when I started underwater photography. After all I had been a photographer - both amateur and professional - for nearing five years when I picked up my first Nikonos. I'd been diving for almost six months and so knew how to breathe and use the equipment.
So I went for it and was deflated like a beach ball on a barbeque. The results were terrible. They were exposed correctly and most were almost sharp, but the composition was off, and the subject lost in the frame. I couldn't understand it and put it down to the unfamiliar equipment. The Nikonos V is a rangefinder camera and I hadn't used such an antiquated system since college. My second roll though was just as bad - one good image - I thought I'd better get some help.
I looked at books and magazines, noted the positions of the subjects and how the light had been set. I started to realise where I was going wrong and made notes on what I wanted out of the next roll.
I had fallen into the usual beginner traps - not moving close enough into the subject and shooting downwards.
Getting into the action
Underwater photography, unlike conventional wildlife photography needs to be conducted up close. To get the best results you have to put as little water between your lens and the subject as possible. Water is terrible stuff: it holds small particles that reduce the contrast and sharpness of your image; disperses light and absorbs parts of the visible spectrum. Thankfully, if you are very patient most fish and other marine animals will let you get so close you can almost pet them.
Add some artificial light into the picture and you should get a stunning result. Underwater, flashes are called strobes and are as essential as the camera itself. As I said, water absorbs various parts of the visible spectrum - reds and oranges first followed by yellows and greens - the photographer has to replace them. Strobes come in various sizes and while many photographers believe they need the biggest, a medium sized unit is perfect. Except for the most basic 'compact style' cameras, most flashes are off the camera and connected via an arm and lead.
When shooting with flash it is, obviously, important to get the exposure right. These days most units come TTL ready and should give the correct light in all, but the most tricky conditions. The photographer though has to ensure it is pointed in the right direction. Sounds simple, but that tricky little sucker - water - has another curve ball to throw. Not only does it muck up the quality of the image, but it also refracts the light so your subject appears closer and larger than it really is. Some photographers use a touch mounted on their strobe. It pinpoints the spot the strobe is pointed. However, it doesn't work in bright conditions. You can also get laser pointers, but I prefer the good old guess method. A little gamble actually makes the photography more fun for me - more human and with the potential to go wrong. It makes you experiment more than rely on the clinical technology.
With the quality of the image taken care of, the most important element must be tackled - composition. There is, of course, the rule of thirds. It is just as important under the waves as above it. But there is one rule above all others in underwater photography. A few exceptions aside (every rule must have an exception) an underwater photographer must shoot looking up at their subject. Marine life lives in not so much a survival of the fittest world, but a survival of the hidden. Good camouflage means you'll survive - probably - but it also means you're damn hard to photograph well. When the idea is to blend in with the background trying to get a clear shot is tricky. The secret is to get a plain background rather than a cluttered one. The best way to do that is to use the clear water above the sea floor. Makes sense when you think about it, but it's not always that easy to achieve.
Killer touch
When photographing in the tropics, the coral reef environment offers a cornucopia of subjects, but virtually everything you could touch is alive. Touch it and it will die. It puts a massive responsibility on a photographer's shoulders. Many take that and act responsibly. Some though want a shot no matter what they have to break, kill or damage. It is important to stress to anyone who is keen to start underwater photography that as well as learning how to take a picture, you must also be environmentally aware. If you have to damage anything to take a shot - don't take it.
Equipment
There is a saying about underwater photography equipment that is quite apt: Take the cost of land photography and add another 0 on the end. It is expensive and if something goes wrong, you very often have to buy a whole new system.
There are two real routes to take.
Amphibious cameras such as the Sea and Sea MX10, Motormarine II or Nikonos V are perfect for beginners and provide a good starting block. All have interchangeable lenses, a choice of strobes and various other accessories to alter the style of photography from macro to wide-angle. Also the second-hand market in all these units is fairly buoyant meaning you can get a full system for a fraction of the price. If you decide on this option always ensure the camera and strobes are fully serviced and sound.
By far the most popular option these days is the housed camera system. This is a standard land camera such as a Nikon F90x or F100 inside a watertight case. Most are aluminium, but there are Perspex models as well. It gives the user full access to the interchangeable lenses and the technology of modern land systems. Housed cameras seem the best choice and arguably are, but they are also the most expensive. Housings are not cheap, and then you have to add the cost of a port and gears for the lens, a strobe or two and then pray none of it goes wrong.
If I haven't put you off underwater photography then I'm glad, come and join the rest of us. The euphoria of getting great results is addictive and the boost to your confidence at seeing that first great result is in
