So in the previous post, I’ve already explained the story about how I came to transition from a Canon to a Nikon, and also the reasons that I inevitably and irrevocably made the switch. Frankly, I do not foresee Canon changing their ways anytime in the near future. And actually, there’s no need for them to do so. Why? Because like it or not, Canon has plenty of good points as well. Just like any good camera company, both Canon and Nikon have both their own pros and cons. Now that I’ve been using a Nikon camera for the past few months, and Canon for more than 2 years prior, let me take a stab at explaining the pros and cons of both these imaging powerhouses.

Canon – The Light Side:

Fantastic Range of Full Frame lenses

Without a doubt, Canon has the widest range of lenses, particularly full-frame compatible ones. It is worth noting that ALL of Canon’s premium L lenses are built for full-frame, and as such can be used for ANY model of Canon camera in the existing lineup, regardless of sensor-size. If I were to pinpoint the greatest strengths of Canon’s lenses, they will be the f/4.0 L lens series (17-40mm, 24-105mm, 70-200mm, 70-200mm IS), and also the L super-fast primes (24mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.2, 85mm f/1.2, 135mm f/2). No other camera company (aside from Leica – no Autofocus) makes current production lenses as fast as those exotic primes that Canon has. They inadvertently cost a bomb and a half, but the point is, they exist, and many a photographer find these lenses drool-worthy. The f/4.0 L lens series on the other hand, offers a high quality enthusiast level lens range without breaking the bank (too much). This versatile kind of lens segment does not really exist in Nikon’s full frame camp.

Note that I have omitted the f/2.8 range (professional photojournalists’ and photographers’ bread and butter range) as this is available even on Nikon’s end. Nikon also has arguably the two sharpest f/2.8 lenses in the world today: the 14-24mm f/2.8 and 24-70mm f/2.8. Some consider these two the new gold-standards in ultra wide angle and normal zooms. The Canon’s equivalents are now slightly more dated and thus, unfortunately pale in direct comparison. Nevertheless Canon also draws strength from the fact that ALL the L lenses and a good number of their pricier non-L lenses actually have USM built in. This feature allows for quiet focusing and also manual focus override. Nikon, on the contrary are absolutely stuck in a previous era as a good majority of their non-pro lenses still do NOT possess AF-S (the Nikon equivalent of USM).

Two lenses that are not full-frame that are also worth noting on Canon’s camp are the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 10-22mm. These two lenses are amazing. I’d go as far as to say, optically, the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is the BEST APS-C lens to date. Nikon’s pricier 17-55mm DX f/2.8 may have superior build quality but lacks the IS (Image Stabilization), which frankly is a real lifesaver for the working photographer. Up till recently, the 10-22mm of Canon also had no parallel in Nikon’s end for the price range. Having said that, as of 2009, Nikon has released the 10-24mm lens and priced only slightly more than Canon’s equivalent. As such I feel they are now on par in that area, but with a slight advantage to Canon.

APS-C Full Compatibility

Now, also from a lens-related point of view, Canon APS-C cameras also can use ANY lens in Canon’s current lineup without as much of a hitch. There are no compatibility problems. Nikon’s recent low end cameras (D40, D40x, D60, D5000) on the other hand, do not have the same flexibility as they do not have a autofocus motor built in. In fact, the aforementioned cameras can only use AF-S lenses. As such, even though these Nikon cameras are targeted at the lower budget bracket, they will not have access to autofocus for the cheapest must-buy in Nikon or any other camera manufacturer’s lineup – the 50mm f/1.8. This, to me personally, is a big mistake on Nikon’s part. Canon has no such problems.

They do however, have slightly different limitations when it comes to full frame. I’ll cover this when I talk about Nikon’s strengths further below.

Higher Definition Images

I am actually against the whole megapixel race. Firstly, it creates huge files of which I don’t really need. Secondly, packing too many pixels into a same sized sensor often results in ugly noise appearing in photos. Thirdly, the pros who relied on the old 5D created amazing large prints with 12 Megapixels. So how come suddenly 21 Megapixels is REQUIRED?

Having said that, at the risk of contradicting myself, I have to say that higher megapixels does indeed mean something if done right. Canon’s 5D Mark II is one example of doing it right. They managed to nearly match the industry standard for low noise, and yet managed to squeeze 21 Megapixels into the sensor. That is a LOT of detail. If you have a very good L lens to pair with the camera, you can actually see the pores and tiny imperfections of human skin upon zooming in to 100%. Frankly, if I were a macro photography enthusiast, or someone who needs to print large on a regular basis, I’d likely think of Canon as my go-to camera. Nikon’s entire current range is at 12 Megapixels at the moment, and they only have one 24 Megapixel camera in the D3x. This camera, although rated to possess the best DSLR sensor by dxomark.com, is not only priced at an extreme premium (think RM 20,000+), but also not as good as Canon’s 5D Mark II (RM 8000+) sensor at high ISO.

HD Video

Canon is an total imaging solutions company, and as such has a full lineup of video cameras in their portfolio. Therefore if I had to choose between Canon and Nikon when it came to video, I’d put my money on Canon to deliver a superior product. This is because I firmly believe that they can easily leverage on their video division to try and incorporate as many relevant features as possible into their still cameras. In many ways, they have proven this fact as Nikon’s attempts in the D90 and D5000 pale in comparison to Canon’s 5D Mark II and 500D.

Granted, as long as Canon chooses not to shortchange its photographers, you can rest assured that Canon will always have an ace up their sleeve when it comes to being able to implement video into their DSLRs. Nikon will be playing catch up in this area for a while to come.

Superior Customer Service & Support

This is something Nikon clearly takes for granted. In my own personal experience, it is a joy to deal with Canon’s after-sales support. They even have a Canon Professional Service (CPS) membership where they give priority servicing to their professional photographers.

I wish I could say the same for Nikon. Someone clearly needs to look at their support center and find out better ways to deal with the economic downturn than to charge for basic sensor servicing of which Canon, as of press time, still offers for free as long as you’re willing to wait. And that’s only the small stuff. There have been so many horror stories with Nikon’s services, particularly in Malaysia, that you tend to wonder how they are able to keep their existing customers happy.

In line with the excellent marketing of Canon, they are more than capable of knowing how to service their client from start to finish, and maybe even beyond. And as such I have to give it to them on putting emphasis on after-sales support.

That pretty much sums up what I feel Canon’s key strengths are in. They used to be leaders in sensor and low light performance too. However the mantle has been taken away from them by Nikon ever since Canon decided to go megapixel racing rather than improving noise performance. And since we’re on the topic of Nikon, let me tell you the strengths of Nikon.

Nikon – The Dark Side:

Creative Lighting System

This is by far Nikon’s trump card. They are the BEST amongst all DSLR manufacturers when it comes to the flash and lighting department. Firstly, the D80, D90, D300 and D700 all have flash commanders built-in to their cameras. To the uninitiated, this means that you are able to control your Speedlite or external Nikon flash OFF-CAMERA without needing to buy any extra accessories. These camera models, which I mentioned above, are not exactly premium models. In fact the D80 and D90 are priced below that of the Canon semi-pro 40D and 50D. Not a SINGLE Canon camera has this feature. Instead, they make you either buy the ST-E2 (RM800), or a 580EX II flash (RM1600) which you must put ON your camera hotshoe the ENTIRE DURATION in order to get this feature. Nikon gives this useful feature free, and provides for full automatic modes off-camera as well. This means that they can trigger an external Nikon flash out of the box off-camera without any added accessories. For Canon, on the other hand, should you only possess one 580 EX II, you MUST put it on your camera hotshoe regardless of whether or not it is to contribute as a light source to the scene, ie. you need to buy ANOTHER Canon flash to get off-camera capability. As a result of this missing feature, many Canon users resort to third party alternatives such as Pocketwizards, Radiopoppers, Gadget Infinity and Phottix (in order of decreasing price). Up till recently all third party alternatives had to be used in MANUAL mode. However, the latest Pocketwizards and Radiopoppers have solved that problem. Mind you though, these two cost more than RM1000 a pop as well.

So what’s the big deal of having such a feature? Ask anyone in the photography business and they’ll tell you that taking the flash off-camera is one of the sure fire ways of improving a flash-lit photograph. Ever wondered why studio photos always looked so good. The next time you’re involved in one, pay attention to where the light is coming from. Rest assured that it’s only in the rare exception that there will be a light source on the camera itself. The point is, Nikon gives a feature that lets you experiment with external light (the key ingredient in any photograph), without needing you to foot out more money from your hard-earned reserves. The possibilities are endless here, and should you need inspiration on what’s possible, I point you to Joe Mcnally, a talented photographer whom is Nikon’s ambassador for the Nikon CLS system.

Superior Feature Sets and Value Added Items

In comparison to Canon, Nikon’s cameras are often more packed with photographic features that actually matter. For instance, even the current lowest end camera of Nikon, the D5000, has the ability to have manual white balance via Kelvin scale. Canon has purposely omitted this from their xxxD cameras, including the latest 500D. In fact, as a bit of trivia; before the 450D, no xxxD camera even had a real spot meter. Thankfully though, they have since caved in to market pressure and put that into the 450D and 500D. Furthermore, as I’ve mentioned in the previous point, a lot of the Nikon cameras also have the useful flash commander mode function.

One key feature that is also not skimped on, is the autofocus system. Nikon’s latest autofocus system has 51 AF points, and frankly, it works superbly. If someone using Canon tells you that only the Center Focus point is important, it is because they’ve never used the Nikon autofocus system before. The D3x, D3, D700 and D300 sport this system. In fact, even the current D80, D90 and D5000 cameras sport what used to be a semi-pro 11 point D200 AF system. Canon’s very latest semi-pro 5D Mark II and 50D have much less sophisticated systems (the 5D Mark II’s system is 3 years old, and the 50D has 9 points only – albeit the latter is known to be quite good in its own right). How Canon gets away with things like this bemuses me. You may feel free to verify with Nikon users who have one of the aforementioned 51 AF point cameras. Trust me, the latest Nikon system will beat the lights out of the Canon’s system in almost any normal day-to-day circumstance. Canon reserves their best AF system for the 1D and 1Ds range. So to the regular enthusiast like myself, I’ll just have to dream on if I want these in a prosumer Canon DSLR.

One trend you’ll notice is that Nikon does not take away important photographic features as you move down the product line. In fact, to those who analyze the trend, they are more likely to remove performance related ones that are hard to define on paper, ie. you will only feel the difference if you own the camera that’s higher in the food chain – this is Nikon’s market differentiation strategy. Canon, however will enjoy chopping stuff away features to create their market differentiation. Unfortunately, if you’re a Canon user, it works. Hence you will always want the more expensive camera.

Nikon also gives you the lens hood and pouches for all their latest lens releases in the past 2-3 years, regardless of whether consumer or professional level. Furthermore, almost all the consumer end AF-S lenses have in-built silent motors. Canon only reserves these value added features for their premium L lenses and a select few non-L lenses.

This Nikon trait of giving you more value-added stuff, is also applicable to their flagship Speedlites. You get a stand, diffuser, gel holder and color gels with the SB800/900. It also has the ability to be triggered optically by any camera flash (it doesn’t have to be Nikon). Canon’s 580EX II, comes with a stand and… hmm… nothing else. And Canon’s not very friendly. Canon flashes only ‘talk to’ Canon flashes and no one else.

APS-C Lens Innovation

Frankly, when it comes to well performing APS-C lenses, you are spoilt for choice when you’re a Nikon user. With the exception of the 17-55mm f/2.8 (which Canon wins on, ironically on its feature set), the rest of Nikon’s APS-C range is fantastic. They are the ones who were the first to come up with a 18-200mm VR lens. This lens was so successful that Canon caved in and had to make their own version. Furthermore, they have the latest 35mm f/1.8 at a reasonable price. This lens is an equivalent of a ‘normal’ lens that was always missing from the APS-C range from both Canon and Nikon’s lineup. In fact, a third party lens company called Sigma capitalized on this and as thus have their own 30mm f/1.4 which still sells strongly till today. With Nikon’s 35mm f/1.8 now available, Sigma will have easily lost half of their initial market share.

Canon’s APS-C lens range, aside from the 17-55mm f/2.8 and 10-22mm, arguably pales in comparison when it comes to optical performance and value-for-money. The reason for this is that Canon does not want you to stay with APS-C and instead wants you to ‘graduate’ to full frame and their premium L lenses. That is, after all, where the big money is.

Full Frame Camera Compatibility

This is an interesting point. Basically, Nikon’s full frame cameras can use any of the lenses in the entire Nikon lens range including the APS-C ones. And this makes sense because you’d naturally expect the more expensive camera to be able to use more of the entire product lineup. In fact, the way they did this was innovative genius. Canon on the other hand, does not share this glory. Basically, from what is clearly a marketing decision on Canon’s end, all their EF-S or APS-C lenses CANNOT be used on their full frame cameras. If you do attempt to try it, be prepared for a Canon repair bill.

Although one might argue that it is counterintuitive to want to use APS-C glass on full frame, there’s no harm in having the option right? We as human beings love options. So when you’re in the Canon camp, the moment you think of full frame, get ready to sell all your APS-C glass ‘coz they will just instantly be made redundant the moment you make the switch.

Well, that’s the gist of it really. Regardless of which camp you belong to, there’s always going to be pros and cons to any system.

What about other brands? Well, they’re all good as well, but there are reasons why Canon and Nikon remain the two top DSLR companies in the world. To put it bluntly, both Canon and Nikon have decades of heritage, reputation and continuity in their favor. And when you’re a Canon or Nikon user, you are frankly, spoiled for choice when it comes to lenses and accessories. Even reputed third party lens companies such as Sigma, Tamron and Tokina design the Canon and Nikon mounts first before any of the rest. No disrespect to the likes of Panasonic, Sony, Pentax or Olympus, but they have still a lot more work to do. Don’t get me wrong though, I absolutely love the concept of the latest Olympus Pen camera, and I also strongly believe that Sony is fast catching the top two. Furthermore I am a huge fan of Panasonic point and shoot cameras.

Just my 2 cents worth: If you do want to consider any of the other brands aside from Canon and Nikon in this day and time, get them because you’re HAPPY and SATISFIED with whatever products you’re going to buy at the START. These companies actually have even MORE features than Canon and Nikon in their cameras, but the problem is that you won’t be able to grow much into their respective systems for now, as their lens and accessory ranges are severely limited. More importantly, you miss out on the opportunity to share the photographic experience; the higher number of Canon and Nikon means that there is a higher possibility of sharing fellow photographers’ existing same-brand gear. So just keep that point in mind.

At the end of the day, whichever camera brand you choose, just remember to pick the one which has the features and perhaps even the lenses that you aim to get (cameras get updated nearly yearly, lenses only in 5-10 years). And make those decisions on what is available TODAY, not on speculation and hope. If you are only going to make your decision in 6 months time, then base your choice on the features and lenses available in 6 months time. The bottomline is to be HAPPY with what you are going to get NOW. Also, never let whatever you do NOT own YET stop you from progressing further photographically.

The gear is just a means to achieve the final image. The photographer inevitably is the one who makes the difference. Gear is important, brand less critical, but both only show its full weight in gold when it’s in the hands of one who’s capable and knows how to take FULL advantage of what they possess. Apply that, and I believe you would have already surpassed me as a photographer.

Enjoy the light!

The Canon vs. Nikon Conundrum

Part 1 – My Personal Journey’s Backstory
Part 2 – The Feedback Letter
Part 3 – The Marketing Machine
Part 4 – The Grass Is Always Greener

PS: A little bit of useless trivia. The reason why Canon is known as the light side and Nikon the dark side, has nothing to do with one being good and the other being evil. The next time you spot professional photographers carrying their super-huge telephoto lenses, pay attention to the color (of the lens please, not the skin), particularly sports photographers. You will notice that there will be white and black lenses. The white lenses belong to Canon, and black lenses belong to Nikon. Now this is not really universal, as Canon themselves has lots of black lenses, and Nikon has one grey colored lenses. But it is this mild differentiation, and the fact that these colors are only applicable to LONG telephoto lenses, that they are compared to the light sabers of the Star Wars’ Jedi. After all, these lenses do have an affinity to ‘light’ too =P

I ended the previous part of the story with some very strong words. I basically accused Canon of ‘handicapping’ and ‘under-specifying’ their products on purpose. Not only that, I went as far as to call the 5D Mark II and 50D disappointments, and even found a way to discredit the 18-200mm IS. And all this without justification. Oh dear, I might be turning into Jeremy Clarkson.

Now since I’m already on the verge of getting on the nerves of all Canon photographers, I might as well go all out and do this. The following is my explanation:

5D Mark II

It has all the makings of an awesome camera. It even has lineage. In fact, for the record, it is an amazing piece of photographic equipment. However, how can Canon justify the AF system, a 3 year old hand-me-down from the original 5D. Even the 40D and 50D has arguably better AF. You want to know why they didn’t update it? Don’t believe the press release when they say it’s because it’s more reliable. Wrong. It’s usable. But the reason is so that WHEN they finally get to developing a NEW AF system, they can put it in the 1D Mark IV and 1Ds Mark IV and charge you a few more thousand bucks for it.

Also, if you compare this camera to the old 5D, nothing really photographic has changed. Oh yes, there’s ISO 25600 (good job and equals Nikon’s achievements), there’s 21 MP (really, is this absolutely necessary? – think 30MB RAW files), and the fantastic 1080p HD video. But is there really anything else? Not really. There are little bits here and there but it’s very much to match the market standards. So what you are paying for is the extra MP and the HD video in comparison to its competitors. And until recently HD video without manual control.

You know what my theory is on this delay in manual control? Canon was forced to play their hand because the D700 was released. You see, prior to the D700, Canon had the enthusiast full frame market all to itself. No competition. No fight. That’s why the old 5D stayed in the product line for 3 YEARS. That’s a lifetime in the world of technology. If not for the D700, Canon would have gladly waited till 2009 to get the 5D Mark II out. Instead, they released it before the end of 2008. So I believe we have to thank Nikon for this.

50D

Again Canon was being reactive rather than being proactive. Reactive to what, you say? Why, the D300 of course. You see, within a few days of Canon releasing the 40D, Nikon launched the D3 and D300. What shocked the world was that the D300 was essentially a D3 (on par with Canon’s 1D series = costing upwards of RM13,000) with an APS-C sensor. It had all the bells and whistles, a sharper screen, 51 point pro-level AF, the Nikon CLS built in and the list goes on. Basically the kitchen sink. And the asking price? About RM1500 more than the Canon 40D. Now you see, prior to the 40D, the xxD series was on a 1 and a half year cycle. Meaning you’d have to wait 18 months for the 50D. However, this changed in 2008. They cut it to 12 months. That should be a good thing right? Yes and no. Canon did such a rushed job with this camera that all they really wanted was a camera that looked good on PAPER. So what did they do? Okay, 15 MP (Yay, 15MP > 12MP), ISO 12800 (Yay, ISO 12800 > ISO 6400), 3” HD LCD (Yay, 3” HD = 3”LCD). And they made it cheaper than the D300. So hands down victory right? Wrong again. The camera’s ISO 6400 and ISO 12800 are just rubbish.

And seriously, seriously, what’s the big fuss about all the megapixels? It’s like the old days of how PCs were compared for their Megahertz. Now you look at PCs and the top end ones are maybe 2.4 GHz. Wait a minute, I thought they reached 3.0 GHz years ago? Yes they did, but then Intel had to undo all the marketing they did because they had educated the consumers that MHz and GHz was everything, when it actually wasn’t. The same applies for megapixels. It does not equate to a better camera. Ever wondered why the 2 year old 8 megapixel DSLR takes better images than a brand spanking new 12 megapixel point and shoot compact camera? Food for thought.

And the other thing. ISO is just a number unless its usable and NOT noisy. It’s a bit like telling you the Proton Saga can reach a top speed of 250 km/h. But what they don’t tell you is if you reach that speed, your car will rattle itself to bits and the car engine will blow up. Canon’s 50D is absolutely noisy at ISO 12800. But they put it in for marketing purposes. Everything else about the 50D is the 40D in near duplication (which for the record, are both excellent cameras in their own right). How’s that for advancing technology? Again, who do we thank for the 50D? The Nikon D300. Maybe even the D90.

18-200mm IS

Okay, this lens is frankly a little late. But Canon delivered it. Better late than never, right? Yes, but Canon asked for more money for this lens than Nikon, and don’t even give you a lens hood or a lens pouch. Oh, and did I mention the optics are near identical in performance? They didn’t even give you manual focus override, which comes standard with the Nikon. Why? To protect the Canon L lens range. You see, if you’re a Canon user, the only time your lenses will have hoods or pouches is when it’s an L lens. Yes, that awesome 10-22mm UWA and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens does not come with any nice extras even though they both cost about RM2500 and RM3800 respectively (which by the way, is pricier than some L lenses).

What does this scream? Purposeful market segmentation. Giving you less than the norm so that you will WANT the premium L range. Yes, some may argue that those accessories don’t affect the image. Correct. But is it really so hard to give us these small extras? Heck, Nikon’s giving it without charging extra. Isn’t there a saying which goes, ‘it’s the little things that matter’?

And actually here’s one more theory of mine. Canon didn’t really want to give you this lens. You see, they have this 28-300mm L lens which costs an arm, a leg and then some. Also, they’ve already created the 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS consumer lenses. So why did they cave in? I think by now you can see where I’m headed with this. The answer: Because the 18-200mm VR alone was moving Nikon sales by the bucket loads. And when that happens, it eats into Canon’s market share. What better way to address this than to fight fire with fire, no?

*deep breath*

Yet in spite of all that I’ve said above, we will still continue to buy Canon cameras and lenses. Why? Because they have one of the best marketing in the world of digital imaging. We immediately think of Canon as one of THE brands for cameras. And they’ve earned it. They make excellent end to end imaging solutions, from the time the image is captured, right till the actual print. They also pick better ambassadors to target the consumers (think Canon’s Maria Sharapova over Nikon’s Ashton Kutcher). They are, by far, aside from Sony, geniuses at marketing. I’ll put them as high up as I rate Apple as well (the latter is one case study every marketing student should analyze).

Actually I akin Canon and Nikon to Toyota and Honda respectively. The latest Vios used the same engine as the previous version, and only changed the external looks. The new Honda City went through an entire revamp, from the inside to the outside. This is very much like the 40D -> 50D (Vios) and the D200 -> D300 (City). One other main similarity in the rivalry, albeit in a completely different industry, is that Toyota, like Canon, are the market leaders. So they CAN rest on their laurels. The motto: “If it aint’ broken, don’t fix it” rings like a mantra to market leaders. And frankly, there’s nothing really wrong with that. They earned their right to do so. And trust me, their products have to work and succeed first, before they can earn this right. So kudos to you Toyota and Canon.

But to me, being able to see through all of this product after product, is like knowing your best friend lied to you, and isn’t apologizing for it. Instead he/she keeps covering it up with more and more stories and excuses, in hope you’ll accept that he/she didn’t intend it. And then in the end try and coax you into believing that there wasn’t a lie to begin with. I will even go as far as to say Canon makes you believe that what you have is GOOD ENOUGH, rather than giving you the BEST that you DESERVE.

I believe on that bombshell, I have gotten myself into a fair bit of trouble (please do not throw red paint at me…). But anyway, if you can see past all of what I’ve wrote, and keep your emotions in check (yes, I mean you, all you Canon users and fans), you can tell that I have already got an deeply imbued bias within me. Canon, like an ex-girlfriend, is now a memory I get very emotional about, ie. something I no longer wish to relive even if there were many great times shared. It is PERSONAL. And as such, it is hard to forgive and forget.

So to all the fence-sitters, before you go run out and buy Nikon gear just because I have thrown dirt at Canon, HOLD YOUR HORSES. I want to make this very clear. The grass is always going to be greener on the other side. And in my next part, with the recent few months of experience with Nikon on my side, I will reveal to you how my dark heart feels that Canon, like all great companies, has its strengths. Frankly, there are quite a few that can whip Nikon’s ass.

Now that I’m on the other side, I can tell you what you’ll miss if you join me on the DARK SIDE of the FORCE. Tell you these secrets, I will… hmm…

To be continued…

The Canon vs. Nikon Conundrum

Part 1 – My Personal Journey’s Backstory
Part 2 – The Feedback Letter
Part 3 – The Marketing Machine
Part 4 – The Grass Is Always Greener

PS: For the record I own a Vios, and I was very sore 6 months later when the new City came out. You see, I liked the Honda Civic, but it wasn’t within my budget. And to make matters worse the old City (no offence) is ugly. So I settled for the lesser of the two evils, ie. the dugong a.k.a. flowerhorn a.k.a. mouse. We live, we learn. The Vios is a great car though, just so happens the new City came out 6 months too late. That’s my confession. Smite me.

Now there’s a reason why I started this article with a backstory of my own photographic journey. If you actually do a stock take of the gear I owned before I made the switch, here’s what you’d have come up with:

• Canon 350D camera
• 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
• 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
• 50mm f/1.8
• 85mm f/1.8

The glass themselves are highly rated in the Canon APS-C world. And I’m not even counting the investment in the 580EX II flash, and all kinds of other bibs and bobs I acquired along the way that were Canon specific. So in summary, I had every reason NOT to switch and just get a camera upgrade from Canon. But the fact is, I didn’t and I still switched. Albeit after a painful financial blow, and also a lot of sleep loss.

Why? Why didn’t I take the most obvious route and stick to Canon? I could perhaps consider a 2nd hand 40D, or a brand new 50D? If I wanted full frame I’d be able to choose from the classic and now legendary 3 year old Canon 5D, and also the brand spanking new HD video capable 5D Mark II. And, as popular rule of thumb applies, I’ve already got an investment of glass in Canon, so I should just stick with them. And as we all know by now, I broke that rule. Why?

The answer to that is NOT a simple one.

Now to those of you who know me well enough, I spend too much time on the Internet reading and researching on all things photography. One minute I’m scouring the 2nd hand markets over Malaysian forums, the next I’ll be spending time reading photography related articles from various Internet sources, and even analyzing MTF charts and reviews on popular photography review pages. So much so, I even compiled a whole page of links for the similarly inquisitive as I. Needless to say, I read online on photography a lot more than I photograph, and as a result I’d like to think I’m fairly informed, though I am susceptible to mad spending of my hard earned money on camera gear.

Well, in order to explain my answer, I’ll need to rewind the clock a bit. I started to get rather frustrated with Canon over their new camera releases of late 2007 and the whole of 2008. It was around this time that Nikon had sent shockwaves by announcing the D3 and D300, two fantastic cameras, just weeks after Canon played safe and released an incremental update of the 30D in the form of 40D. Canon’s aging 5D, then nearly 3 years old, was also not updated.

Ever wonder why Canon do things the way they do? I have a theory, and I will share this with you. In short, it’s called MARKETING, and the age-old saying “If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it.” There’s really nothing wrong with what they’re doing, since, they are after all the market leaders.

You see, I was in the market to ‘plan’ my camera upgrade. But in a classic case of ‘gearhead-edness’ and not spending enough time doing ACTUAL photography (yes, I am indeed guilty as charged), I got quite frustrated. Frustrated enough that in the middle of 2008, before the announcements of the Canon 50D, Nikon D90, and Canon 5D Mark II and right after the announcement of the Nikon D700, I wrote a LONG email to Canon Malaysia. I even cc-ed a copy to Chuck Westfall, which as of current date was and still is the manager of the Camera Divison Technical Information Dept of Canon U.S.A.

Here is a copy of the exact same email, unedited and unfiltered other than for some typos I only just corrected. Please note that for those whom are not into DSLR photography, or technically inclined, you may want to zoom right past this email. Also Canon lovers,  as I mentioned in my disclaimer, I warn you that this email will sting you.

Dear XXXX,

Below are my honest opinions on the Canon EOS line, and I hope you can spare a few minutes of your time to just have a read through and ponder the validity of some of the points I’m about to make.

I originally intended to send this email to the head of Canon Malaysia but am not sure how to obtain the contact of this individual. As such I have sent a copy of this email to the general email address of Canon Malaysia at Helpdesk, and also another copy to Chuck Westfall, the manager of the Camera Division Technical Information Dept of Canon U.S.A.

First and foremost, I realize that Canon is indeed a marketing giant, and as an EOS user, I can truly analyze and observe the many marketing decisions that Canon makes to ensure they ‘protect’ their own product line.

However, here are my qualms. To begin with, I believe it’s about time that some of the old prime lenses are phased out. There are some which are more than 15 years old already, and are in dire need of updating. Nowadays with digital, the chromatic aberrations are starting to become startling obvious on these lenses.

Furthermore, I do believe there isn’t a real need to have a 1.3x crop sensor that is the 1d Mk # range. There really isn’t much of a market segment that’s being created there. I really do feel that what is really needed is an update of the old 5D, and perhaps a Full Frame camera targeted at the sports photographers market segment. I believe the 1Ds Mk # series on the other hand, can retain its place as there is still a good niche market which demands for high resolutions which are close to that of the medium formats.

I’m also completely agreeable with the decision to come up with the 1000D and 450D. This opens up a new market for budget DSLRs and credit is due to those who decided on this. However I do feel a clear-cut flagship is required in the APS-C format. The 40D is starting to look like a pretender with the likes of the Nikon D300 in the market. For not much more money, there’s just so much more camera in the Nikon D300, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find a lot of Canon loyalists starting to waiver.

I also reckon that it’s time to stop resting on the laurels of the aging 5D. It’s already 3 years old, and is sorely in need of an update. This camera should already be phased out, and the blunder that was the AF problems with the 1D Mk III should perhaps be taken as an indication that it might be time to phase the APS-H line out also. The Nikon D3 easily contests with the 1D Mk III for similar money and a REAL full frame sensor. It’s no wonder that even at a major event like the Tour De France, more sports and action photographers are choosing Nikon. I will not be surprised if the trend reveals itself in full force at the Beijing Olympics 2008.

I feel that there is potential for a new market segment by releasing a TRUE flagship APS-C and also two Full Frame cameras. One a budget option like the 5D in its heyday, and one a higher spec-ed one to target the would be D3-owners. I know it’s easy for me to suggest these things, but I do feel there’s some weight to this argument.

In terms of lenses, I think it’s high time Canon did something about the 50mm range. The f/1.4 lenses sorely needs an update with frequent complaints of extremely soft imagery wide open and a dated non-ring USM. I reckon, even if the price were to be increased on the f/1.4, but a new updated version released, the sales of this lens will really start picking up. The 50mm f/1.2, with its poor track record, might also deserve a second look at.

I am also one of the many thousands of Canon users who just wish that Canon would just release a REAL 18-200 IS. Never mind if the optics aren’t 100% fantastic, or if a plastic lens mount is to be put with no real USM motor. It’s about time it gets released before more potential customers use Nikon just to access the fantastic 18-200 VR. Don’t get me wrong, the idea to have both the 18-55 IS and 55-250mm IS is an inspired one, but really, is it really that difficult for a technological giant like Canon to make one? In fact, if it’s good enough, perhaps even the 17-85mm, which isn’t all that well accepted due to its optical flaws can be phased out slowly.

I do believe also that there’s room for Canon to start pioneering ideas, and perhaps the niche market segment that the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 has created for the APS-C revolution. If Canon were to release their own version, be it an EF-S one, a huge demand would also be created. Perhaps this is against the marketing strategy of Canon (protecting the L lens range or what not), but there clearly is a demand for this lens, the numbers don’t lie. It’s no use trying to rely on the dated and aging 28mm 1.8.

And then there’s the L lenses. I think it’s about time that Canon releases a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS. The pros have been crying for it, and although it would be a premium product, it would be a perfect reply to the double whammy of the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 24-70mm f/2.8 (the latter of which has tested to be a fantastic optic end-to-end). Also with major reviewers commenting on the sharpness (or rather the lack of) on the premium 70-200 f/2.8 IS, I do believe the pro market deserves more attention and an update to what is surely a workhorse lens that will serve to strengthen instead of weakening Canon’s current lineup. I know this is possible, as Canon’s own 70-200 f/4.0 IS is one of their sharpest to date, so what’s stopping the release of a new 70-200 f/2.8 IS?

I really have to stress that the small things that a company like Nikon pays attention to really does make a difference. Take for instance their in camera viewfinder gridlines, and huge viewfinders (on a enthusiast level camera like the D80). It doesn’t cost too much more for small things like those I’m sure, but Canon just refuses to give the photographers the best camera they can get. I do strongly believe that Canon is a technological powerhouse, but that seems like something left in the past. They’re rested on their laurels for too long, and I think the facts speak for themselves, that with the release of Nikon’s pro D3, D300 and now the D700, canon’s professional line will start being massacred. Evidence of the entire USA today staff changing their gear, and major event photographers switching over, should already be enough to prove my point.

I’m sure that there are Canon pros who swear by the 1D and 1Ds range, but from an enthusiast’s point of view, I’d rather swear by the D3. It costs so much less than a 1.3x cropped 1D series camera and a heck lot less than a 1Ds series camera. And again, by winning so much critical acclaim, I do believe the pros are speaking for themselves. That camera is so feature loaded it puts the canon flagships to shame. I for one, feel that high ISO performance is more important than keeping the megapixel count. There’s so much more versatility to a camera capable of High ISO rather than a 24MP one. What’s the use of all those megapixels if one can’t even get the shot in low light to begin with?

Speaking of light, then there is the Flash system. ‘Strobist’ is by far one of the fastest growing online communities in the photography world. And their flash of choice? The Nikon SB800, which is already legendary for its feature set and for less money than the 580EX II. Now with the announcement of the SB900, the 580EX II truly just looks like a glorified smack. I really do feel that a cheaper level featured flash is required below the overpriced 430EX. Perhaps keeping the 430EX in the lineup in spite of the 430EX II might be a good idea to allow Canon users to enjoy flash photography. And truthfully, is it really so difficult to have the SU-4 functionality that the SB800 doesn’t charge a single cent more for?

Although I have credited the decision to have the 1000D and 450D, everything else I’ve mentioned thereafter reveals a severe gap. I strongly believe that after 1 year or so of using those cameras, those camera owners will start feeling the disgruntlement that I am feeling now.

Times are changing. And for the giant that Canon is, they are really reacting too slowly. It’s time for some changes, resting on the laurels of former glory won’t do. The competition waits for nobody. A storm’s brewing, and not all of us (myself included) will want to stand with them to weather it out. So this is my plea, before I make the right decision of a photography enthusiast and leave the Canon EOS line for good.

Passionate for the light, and no longer delighted,
Woody Ang

Now if you actually bother to copy and paste this entire email, it will be nearly 1600 words long and take up 3 whole pages in Microsoft Word. This email for me, about one year ago from today, summed up in a polite and curt way every thing I felt was wrong with Canon. Unfortunately since this email, very little has changed in the world of Canon. Mind you, I gave them credit in this email, and even gave constructive suggestions, in spite of the negative vibes emanating.

Some enthusiasts and photographers in-the-know may say that since the time of my email, there’s been the 50D and 5D Mark II. Not to mention, they’ve also answered one of my requests: a 18-200mm IS lens. But unfortunately, in all my red mist, I can see right through these 3 products. I can break down for you the amazing Canon marketing strategy that actually purposely HANDICAPS cameras and UNDER-SPECIFIES lenses to ensure there is enough segmentation in their lineup. And yes, they applied it to all of the 3 aforementioned products on purpose. Now note again, that I’m sure even Nikon does things to have sufficient market segmentation in their lineup, but I personally feel they are not as blatant as Canon.

Again I stress, that these by no means say that Canon makes poor products. On the contrary, their cameras are capable of amazing things. They have one of the most COMPLETE lens ranges and many a photographer has proven that to me time and time again what fantastic imagery can be captured with any of their cameras. Heck, I owned one for more than 2 years. I should know that.

So why then am I still so disgruntled? And what am I harping about by using the words ‘HANDICAPS’ and ‘UNDER-SPECIFIES’? Curious? I’m just getting to it.

To be continued…

The Canon vs. Nikon Conundrum

Part 1 – My Personal Journey’s Backstory
Part 2 – The Feedback Letter
Part 3 – The Marketing Machine
Part 4 – The Grass Is Always Greener

PS: I do realize a lot of this post will come across as Greek and pure techno-babble. I will try and explain some of it in layman terms if there’s enough interest, else don’t worry, this is a one-off thing… =)

My photographic journey really began when I was given my first digital camera by my parents before I went abroad to commence my Year 3 of Electrical Engineering in Melbourne way back in late 2003. This camera happened to be the Canon Powershot A70. This was a camera I did a lot of research on before buying, and as such, having done my due diligence, knew at the time that for the money, I not only had a simple and easy-to-use camera, but also one which had Program Mode, Aperture Mode, Shutter Mode and also Manual Mode. It was with this camera that I embarked on a journey through photography. The same journey which I’ve mentioned in an earlier post that I am still on.

Now the beauty of having being introduced to a camera with so many functions, was the ability to appreciate the benefits of spot metering, macro, long exposures, high ISO (more like to ‘avoid it’), and also panorama stitching. Back in the day I did not know how to use Photoshop, and I pretty much relied on whatever software Canon provided to make the most of my JPEGs.

Then in late 2006, when I was about to start my first official full time job, I decided to reward myself with a new camera, and this came to be the Canon 350D DSLR camera. The decision to get a Canon back in the day was relatively simple. My dad had owned a Canon film SLR. Also, since my first camera was a Canon, in seemed almost natural to transition within the same family. Not only that, I had a very limited budget, and my only other option at the time was the brand new Nikon D40 (which reviews didn’t speak well of due to the missing AF motor) and also a more expensive Nikon D80 or Canon 400D. Back then, I had yet to meet peer who really did any DSLR photography, so I went pretty much on a whim and bought the camera, along with the 18-55mm kit lens and a 90-300mm telephoto.

And from there I went through Phase 1 of my journey, discovering the limitless potential of DSLR photography, and along the way ‘poisoned’ a number of friends to pick it up as well. Phase 2 came swift and fast, and I bought the plastic fantastic 50mm f/1.8. This was not the end of it though. Within the first year of DSLR photography, I had acquired a 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron lens, and also a 50-150mm f/2.8 Sigma lens, whilst selling the first two lenses my camera had come with. Soon afterwards, I learnt the painful way that Sigma lenses had front focusing problems, and thus after a service, decided to sell the Sigma. In its place came the 85mm f/1.8. In an unfortunate incident, my Tamron lens also suffered a poor fate. After rolling off the bed one day and landing with a loud ‘thud’ on the carpeted floor, I had to send it in for repair due to a serious photographic fault. It came back as good as new, but my confidence was shaken, and so as good as the lens was, I sold it.

What happened next? Well, in the midst of all this lens changing, I went through Phase 3 and covered a wedding along with two buddies of mine whom had also just picked up DSLR photography. I even managed to source a very cheaply priced 2nd hand 10-22mm ultra wide angle lens. Soon after, however, things got a little tricky. I loved the Tamron’s versatility and as such needed a direct replacement. I was left with a simple conundrum, but one which ultimately proved to be another case of learning the hard way. I tried to decide between two shortlisted lenses; the 17-40mm f/4.0 L lens, and the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. I went for the former as I was sold by the possibility of one day moving to full frame. To some enthusiasts, this is considered ‘the dream’. The lens served me well. It even survived the extremities atop Mount Kinabalu, and also the pouring rain in Milford’s Sound in New Zealand.

However, one day in a rain drenched adventure at Franz Josef Glacier on the West Coast of New Zealand, my camera bag got soaked in torrential rain. My camera basically went through a serious malfunction and it refused to switch on. I was at a complete loss. My heart sank and I felt a cold shiver running repeatedly throughout my body. I was in a foreign land, with no camera, and at the time I had yet to even see Milford and Queenstown in South Island, both the photographic highlights of my supposed landscape photography extravaganza. After a heart-wrenching night in front of the fireplace drying the camera out, by a sheer miracle, the camera came back to life. The damage? The orientation sensor no longer worked and thus the camera no longer knew if the image was taken in portrait or landscape format in the review mode. Small matter really compared to the worst case scenario.

After going through a week of landscape nirvana in New Zealand, I felt rejuvenated. But there’s always a problem after seeing ‘heaven’. That problem is that you start comparing with ‘heaven’ and very soon I started to get very deflated, and such Phase 4 happened. Upon my return from New Zealand, I sent my trusty, battle weary 350D (a camera which had seen and gone through so much, which aside from the malfunction in New Zealand, also survived a fall against hard rocks up on the summit of Mount Kinabalu) in for a diagnosis. The prognosis was disturbing. Aside from the orientation sensor which was obviously damaged, Canon also found water damage in various other areas and quoted me a repair bill of more than 1000 RM. With a huge resigned sigh, I decided to take it back unrepaired, as it still functioned as a camera. But as a result of the prognosis, in my mind, the camera’s days were numbered. It did not help that I was finding that my images were mis-focusing every now and then.

Right around this time, I started to ponder an upgrade. However, I was dissatisfied with Canon’s attempts at the 40D and 50D, especially in the face of the Nikon D90 and the D300, the latter two clearly more feature packed cameras for the price brackets. As the cost of switching camps was too high for me to consider at the time, I carried on using my battle scarred 350D. In the midst of this, I also considered the jump to full frame by pondering the venerable Canon 5D. Then in early 2009, I purchased the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens and sold the 17-40mm, as I could no longer resist the addiction to fast glass and also the benefit of IS, which until date, I had not been able to personally experience. I pretty much sealed my fate in the APS-C camp. Or so I thought. As I said in an earlier paragraph, I learnt the hard way.

But as life should have it, Phase 4 would hit me longer and harder than I thought it would. My camera started to mis-focus more frequently, and my self-confidence started to deteriorate tremendously. This was not helped on by the fact that a fellow photographer friend mentioned my images were not looking sharp either. After a lot of thought, and putting some of my closest friends through my fickle mindedness, I did the unthinkable. I sold all my Canon gear with the exception of the camera and the 50mm f/1.8 lens. It would be wrong to sell a faulty camera off, and my conscience would not allow it. I kept the 50mm f/1.8 as I felt it was only fair that I kept one lens to use with the film and also the trusty 350D if I ever felt a sense of nostalgia.

What I did next stunned even more people. I purchased a Nikon D700. A huge leap of faith. Not only did I switch camps but I went from a APS-C sensor to a full frame sensor. The big question people ask is why did I switch camps? Why did I not just stick to Canon? Why full frame? Why not just consider the 5D Mark II?

Well, with the backstory covered, I can now go on to the real meat of the story.

To be continued…

The Canon vs. Nikon Conundrum

Part 1 – My Personal Journey’s Backstory
Part 2 – The Feedback Letter
Part 3 – The Marketing Machine
Part 4 – The Grass Is Always Greener

Has anyone ever told you that you could not shoot a wedding with a consumer camera?

How about someone telling you that you can only take events if you have f/2.8 zoom lenses?

Or what about having only the humble 50mm f/1.8. Does that mean you shouldn’t delve into serious photography?

We’ve all had those moments. Moments of self-doubt, perhaps due to peer pressure, or high expectations; mostly even self inflicted.

I learned recently from my own experience (and this isn’t even photographic) to defy convention, and to try to defy the odds that are stacked against you. In this case, it was my participation in the recent 10 km run as part of the KL Marathon. Now, those who know me personally will tell you that I look unfit, and that I would probably never survive this run without training. And yes, they are probably right. Heck, just put it this way: my regular exercise constitutes me sitting at the terminal and perhaps walking to the LRT station before and after work. Well, there’s the odd weekly badminton here and there, of which I’m literally the beginner of the group. Hence, my unfortunate partner at the time will have to do most of the heavy lifting. I don’t gym, and I no longer remember the last time I seriously jogged.

So yes, you are right, the odds are against me. Perhaps as a combination of pure laziness, or a lack of focus, or a multitude of distractions, I did not get around to doing any form of proper training for the run. Right up to this point, my family were already joking I would not make it past the 3 km mark. My friends, well, put simply, they didn’t want to put me down, so they said I’d be able to make it. But I knew from the tone of their voices they didn’t think I would even finish this race.

The amount of self doubt was starting to hit me as well. I tried to reassure myself, and even did some math. 10 km in a qualifying time of 1 hour 30 minutes. Okay, that equals 90 minutes. So it means I’ve to finish 1 km every 9 minutes. To break it down further, 100 m every 54 seconds. Hmmm… seems more than possible. After all, back in the day, I used to be able to run sprints at 15-16 seconds. So perhaps it will be possible. And then it occurred to me the night before, that I’d have to be up by 3+ am to make it to the location as road closures would mean a logistical nightmare. So I would be running on less than 3 hours of sleep in total from the evening prior. Oh joy, this was looking even more like an impossibility.

And so the moment drew close, and I headed off with some friends, did some basic warming up, and joined the huge masses that had signed up to join this 10 km run. Heart beat faster, nervous smiles, and soon, it was 7am, and the start of the run was flagged. So it began. I kept at a pace I was comfortable with, or thought I was. First kilometer passed, and then the second, no sign of slowing down yet. At this point I had already beat a family member’s prediction that I’d run out of steam at the 1 km mark. I reached the 3 km mark before I could not hold the initial pace and brisk-walked (so one family member did get it right), and mind you the way I do the latter is faster than most.

Got to the first water stop, and gulped down a cup (which took a while no thanks to the horrendous organization) but nevertheless, I continued onwards. The next 3 km was an exercise of regulating the brisk-walking to the uphill regions, and the jogs to the downhill portions.

At the 5 km mark I looked at the countdown I had set in my phone for 90 minutes. 45 minutes had passed. I had 45 minutes to cover the rest of the run. Basically, at this point, I felt like I just dug my own grave. I had no idea how I was to finish the remainder in exactly the same time I had finished the first half. But then it happened. I decided not to look at my phone anymore. And I just kept on going. For durations where my legs felt like giving way, I brisk-walked for a few minutes. I zoned out everyone else whom I was passing or was passing me, and just made it a conversation between me and my inner self. I let the music from my phone fill up my eardrums, and focused only on the steps I was taking one at a time.

Every now and then I would pick up the pace until I could not fight the mental strain anymore, and then brisk-walked. I did this interchanging of pace right up till the final kilometer. At that point, I told myself, that there is no way I am going to finish this race walking. Mustering whatever energy I had left, I started to run. Well, to most it would seem like just a jog, but the point is: I was determined that I was no longer going to walk. I held that pace. 100 m passed. The pain increased. I continued to hold pace. Another 100 m. I reminded myself of the Mount Kinabalu climb I did the year before. That climb was one where it was a severe case of mind over matter.

Flashback to one year ago:

The climb took me more than 5 hours on the Mesilau track, of which I carried my DSLR the entire journey. I also took another 3+ hours to get to summit, also with my trusty Canon 350D and 17-40mm lens around my neck, kept underneath my jacket. Ask anybody who’s done the climb and they’d tell you to carry a DSLR is crazy, because the longer you are up the hike, the heavier every SINGLE thing will weigh. Even a camera as light as a 350D in the DSLR world, will weigh like a few kilograms by the time you are nearing the summit. In more ways than one, the Kinabalu climb in itself was another exercise of defying odds and mind over matter. I decided 2 weeks before the actual date to fill up one of the available slots in the trip organized by the company. My training was about 3 hill hikes in the week leading up to the actual climb. And I remember when I was doing the last 2 hours heading up to the summit, my knees were giving way, and I could only take 20-30 steps at a time before having to sit down, lie back and curse. But I persevered. And even when the sun light started to come up, and I started to deflate, I carried on. And I made it in the end. Defied the odds, and made it to see the sun peak over the clouds, and just take in the glory that is the summit of Mount Kinabalu.

Trust me, until now, nothing beats that high of being on top of Southeast Asia, and also having beaten the odds, overcoming your own pains and mental blocks, and most importantly achieving what you thought was impossible.

The words of wisdom my dad passed to me then (he climbed it twice) was simple: “Go at your own pace, you’re not racing with anybody. Take your time.” And that mantra I kept for the KL 10 km run.

Return to present:

Another 100 m. The pain was starting to become unbearable. But I saw the finish line. Moments later, I passed it. And my time: about 1 hour and 15 minutes. I did it. The skinny chap whom no one gave a chance in finishing in the qualifying time, did it. And without training too. It was a moment to savor. And one to shut all the doubters up for some time to come.

So how does this apply to photography? Well it’s simple. The next time someone tells you that you can’t do something because your gear isn’t sufficient, defy them. The world’s greatest photographers of the past, had nothing but prime lenses, manual focus and FILM. And they came home with some of the world’s most renown images. Think Henri Cartier Bresson and Ansel Adams. In fact there are some prominent web writers on photography that claim that the best way to learn photography, is to pick up a film Leica, one prime lens, and shoot in black and white. Mind you, as pricey as that little beauty is, it only has manual focus, and none of the live-view AND large chimp-able LCDs AND awesome 51 AF points, etc.

The point here is to go back to basics. And it doesn’t get any more basic these days than a consumer DSLR and a 50mm f/1.8 lens.

Go out there and shoot the best images you can manage, and prove them wrong. At the very worst, you’ll learn how to appreciate the good gear when you finally do acquire it. But for now, with what you have, go out there and capture the best imagery you can muster. Trust me, if and when you do take back excellent photographs, you will surprise your peer. But most importantly, you will surprise yourself. And from there you will only improve as a photographer.

So the next time you ever doubt you can take a particular kind of photograph, or shoot a particular event taking place, just go out there and do it.

You will learn from it. Chances are you may even enjoy it. And even if you don’t, you’ll come back with lessons learned that no one could teach you by just telling you. And these, my friends, are the lessons that will stick with you. These are the ones, that make you a BETTER photographer.

PS: My next aim is to run the 10 km in under an hour, this time with ’some’ training. Anybody still think it is not possible? =P
Oh, and since we’re on defying odds photographically, what about shooting an event with consumer primes and no zooms? Impossible? =)

Have you ever had a photo that was just taken at the spur of the moment?
What about one that’s taken without even looking through the viewfinder or LCD?
Are some of your favorite photos in your collection the ones you did NOT envision when you first set out to shoot?
Have you ever made all kinds of preparations for a photoshoot, only to realize later that the shots you liked best are the ones you did NOT prepare for?
Did some of your best shots work just because everything fell into place, ie. the natural sunlight, the weather, the clouds, a person appearing at the right time, a cursory unexpected glance, etc.?
Would you ever consider any of your best shots a ‘lucky’ shot?

Did you answer ‘Yes’ to one or more of the above questions? If you did, you might see where I am going with this, but nevertheless do read on to find out.

Back in an earlier post on gear lust, I defined a formula for defining a good image:

Good Image = 20% Camera Body + 30% Camera Lenses & Accessories + 40% Technique/Skill/Composition + 20% Post Processing Ability

What I did not add to that formula was the element of luck. And in my humble opinion, luck has a weight as high as technique/skill/composition.

So, how does luck play a role in photography? Ask any photographer, and chances are that some of their favorite or even most famed and loved shots may have been somewhat accidental, and not at all planned. Yes, amazing photographs are created sometimes from nothing at all. It could be a chance encounter, it could be a shot from the hip, it could be a shot with the wrong lens on, it could have been the 5 minutes that you waited AFTER your official shoot ended. In most cases, it could just be a case of being at the right place at the right time.

Like it or not, luck plays a significant role in photography. Here are some personal examples I can present. The shot at the top of this post, was taken after I had shot at least a dozen shots of just the landscape. It was taken in Queenstown in one of the nearby parks, on the first day of my arrival there, and I was more or less done trying to coax out of my camera some shots of the bushes against the majestic mountains, ie. the classical landscape. I was already ready to start my walk back to the town when suddenly a family of joggers ran past. And it clicked. I turned around, took a deep breath, composed the shot, and snapped. Completely unplanned prior to the moment, and it worked.

Now another example, this one on the top Mount Eden in Auckland. There I was with my tripod, taking in the amazing colors of the sunset, taking multiple exposures in order to try and get a HDR (High Dynamic Range) image via software later. And so after taking what must have been dozens of photos of the same sunset against different views around the peak, I packed up my tripod, and started to walk back to the car. As chance should have it, I spotted a very nice motorcycle parked on my way back, and I just happened to turn my head. And there it was, the biker himself, staring out into the sunset, completely in his own thoughts. I dropped my tripod on the grass, quickly composed the shot, took ONE shot, and this was it.

To me, this will be the classic case of the unplanned leading to a memorable shot. I remember it like it was yesterday. It was one of my very first photography outings at the Kuala Lumpur Bird Park. I had just walked about the park shooting all kinds of birds and even chicks (the real kind, mind you) for hours, and was pretty much poofed, so I had headed for the exit. I had my camera bag with me, so I paused just before the exit, and started keeping my camera into my bag. And without any warning, this peacock unveiled its majestic tail in all its glory. I knew at that very moment, I had to take this photo. I had no time to change lenses, so I used the lens I had on the camera; a humble 50mm f/1.8. Did not even change any settings, and quickly shot 1-2 frames. And just like that, the peacock shut its tail. The moment had passed. But I had the shot.

I think at this point in time, there will be some gasps escaping from the lips of some new budding photographers, and perhaps some sighs in the rest of the knowledgeable photographic community.

You mean to say that photography is about luck? What about all the hullabaloo about skill and gear and composition and experience and all the other jazz? So, we might as well all be photographers, and just take photos with a simple camera phone…

Now hold it right there. I only said luck is a factor. But it really only is ONE factor. Now consider this: just because a moment happens, doesn’t mean you are able to photograph it, unless…

1. You have A camera with you
2. You are able to pick up the camera, aim, and COMPOSE the shot
3. You are able to use your camera in a very, very quick manner without fumbling through the controls

The bottom line is, you MUST know what you are doing. You must have the skill of composition, the technique to pull off the shot, and also have the right focal length for the lucky shot.

There is a saying that goes, luck favors the prepared. And this could not be any more true that it is for photography.

If I did not have my camera with me during one of the above moments, I’d never have gotten any of these images. If I did not know how to compose the shot, let alone use my camera like the back of my hand, I’d never have been able to give it the impact it gives today or capture the moment as it unfolded in front of my very eyes. If I knew nothing about post-processing, I’d never have been able to enhance the shot to bring out the moment as I saw it. And in the words of David DuChemin, if not for the VISION that I had acquired over thousands of exposures, I’d never have been able to translate the moment into the shot anyway.

A good photograph is a lot of things. Luck is only one factor. And if anything, the real talent about the skilled photographer, is CONSISTENCY. Like it or not, luck will only result in one hit wonders. But skill will ensure you are able to capture the moment again, and again, and again… as and when it happens.

So, here’s my message: Train that vision, learn how the camera works, and be prepared. Because as I’ve already said, luck favors the prepared.

It has to be said that not everyone is fortunate enough to be able to travel as part of their job description. Be it a few days of training, a meeting with clients, or medium to long term project stints abroad, there’s something almost classy about being able to travel for business.

Mention business travel to any layperson, and one of the many things that come to mind are phrases like ‘business class’, ’sightseeing’, and in Malaysia specifically ‘Wah, so nice… so lucky!’ Trust me, I’ve heard this enough times that I casually let it go in one ear, and out the other (whilst forcing a smile and shrugging).

Here’s the thing about most business travel. Firstly, it’s usually a bit of give and take. Most of the time, business travel involves a tightly packed schedule to optimize the cost of such a trip, especially if it’s funded by an employer. This would include being quickly whisked away from the airport to the office for scheduled meetings/presentations right up till the end of the business day, chaffeured off back to the hotel, where there is a likelihood of ordering room service, having the TV tuned to CNN/BBC and having the work laptop open to check for emails from back in headquarters. That is, assuming you’re not already on a Blackberry. Business trips are very commonly an exercise of getting as much things done in as little time as possible. So much so, how much time is there left to do the photography that you enjoy the most on your travels? The answer: Very minimal unless you are an excellent time manager.

Of course, it’s not always that bad. As a photography enthusiast, being in a new country always presents a host of opportunities. In the extreme case, you’d at least have photographs of the airport, the hotel room, and the view from in and around the hotel. And perhaps if you’re really lucky, you’d be able to have some time off work, perhaps after business hours, or even over a weekend to wander around and capture in the sights and sounds of the local culture and surroundings. And that of course means if you do bring any kind of photographic kit, you’d be presented with an opportunity to do some form of travel photography.

Therein lies the classic conundrum of a photography enthusiast when on business travel.

Do you or do you not bring your DSLR and its many accessories?
And if you do, which lens do you take with you?
Do you carry a tripod?
Do you forsake the opportunity to shoot altogether?
Or do you compromise and bring a pocketable camera for at least some snapshots?

I myself am faced with such questions whenever I need to go anywhere out of town for business. The dilemma always revolves around whether or not it’s worth carrying all the weight of the professional photographic gear during a trip that is clearly not designated to be a ‘leisurely’ or ‘photographically driven’ one. What if you do happen to have time to shoot? Would you regret not bringing that lens with you that you left behind back home?

The lesson I’ve learnt from all of this, is a case of finding the balance (as in all other things in life). Here’s a simple checklist that might help you in deciding.

Ask yourself the following questions:

1. How much time will you have to do any form of photography during the trip?
If your answer involves only the time after business hours, and no weekends, you might want to consider only taking a pocket camera with you. If you do have a weekend to yourself, and you have a little day-trip or so in mind, by all means bring as much gear as you feel you will use. The key here is to bring only what you will definitely use.

2. What kind of country is it? And how secure do you feel?
Usually in a less developed country or in a country with a not-so-good reputation of security, you may want to leave the expensive gear behind. The last thing you want is to be a screaming billboard of a target. Having said that, if you take the necessary measures and practice a bit of street wisdom, you may be able to work around this problem and carry that DSLR anyway. Me? I’d stick to the pocket camera for the instances mentioned. Though having said that, my pocket camera is an LX3. =)

3. How much luggage space do you have?
Now, do keep in mind that there is rather limited luggage you can bring on business travel, especially with all the working wear and accessories you already need to carry. To add to that, it also will depend on how generous or spendthrift you are feeling; ie. the space required for souvenirs and shopping as well. The important thing here is to ensure you don’t carry more than you need. The 2 kg Manfrotto tripod can be left behind unless you’re really certain you’re going to use it. Perhaps it’s worth considering something like a little Gorillapod.

4. How long is the overall duration of the trip?
Needless to say, the longer the trip, the higher the decision will sway towards the DSLR equipment. Simple reason being that the opportunities for photography tend to increase proportionally to the duration of the travel stint.

Now, having put all this into consideration, there is one last thing you will need to consider.

Really, seriously, ask yourself if you really feel the passion and drive to want to photograph when you’re on this business trip?

If you have even a niggling sense of doubt, stick to the small camera, or better still, borrow one from a friend if you don’t own one. There’s always the option of making use of the camera phone too, but frankly, I’m no iPhone 3Gs user, so I’m not going down that road. Having said that, there’s nothing wrong with the concept and as such, the latter is very much a personal choice of mine.

As one Chase Jarvis says, the best camera is the one you have with you.

So… what kind of camera gear do you bring on a business trip?

The further along this journey you go, the closer you get to your destination. In this case, it’s the journey to define yourself as a photographer. It is about finding out what makes you tick, what sets you apart, what your images say about you, what kind of photography makes you strive for more, and what doesn’t quite strike your fancy.

It could be capturing the life of the people around you. It could be taking grand panoramas around the world. It could be capturing the defining moments of others. It could be bringing out the beauty of strangers through photography. It could be to tell moving tales. It could be about simple poetry. Basically, to each his/her own.

You don’t have to love one of the main genres of photography to define yourself as a photographer. You don’t have to be a professional. Same way you may never even need to own a DSLR. The whole idea behind defining yourself as a photographer, is knowing what kind of photos the person deep inside you wants to take, and will feel fulfilled taking. It’s the sort of photography that will drive you and take you to the next level. If all else fails, it’s the photography that you find joy in doing.

I’ve gotten a lot of nudges in this direction with events that have happened recently. They include Shootfest where I was able to meet a whole list of amazing photographers such as Jon Low, Zach Chin, Jenny Sun and Fiona Lim just to name a few. I could list them all, and I really should, but I know I’ll still forget somebody. So I’ll take my chances.

Then there was Steve McCurry’s talk which took place in Kuala Lumpur recently. To those unfamiliar with this name, Steve McCurry is the photographer behind the iconic image of the Afghan girl. Having seen even more of his work during his short talk organized by the US embassy, I’m left feeling very humbled. His images were jaw-dropping to say the least. It left me with a lot of hidden insight by reading between the lines, but nevertheless I left feeling pretty awestruck.

And then there’s David DuChemin’s Within The Frame, a book I highly recommend to those suffering from Phase 4: The Photographic Lull. Somehow or rather, the author is able to put into perspective (not to mention in the form of a well written book) the means of developing your photographic eye and defining your relationship with photography. He calls it developing your ‘vision’, basically honing your ability to take the images that you see with your mind’s eye. I remember finding this book whilst stumbling through Joe Mcnally’s blog, the latter another photographer whom I am a fan of. Hesitated for a full day, and ordered it from Amazon the next day. No regrets.

I personally have gone through a bit of agony, and put my closest friends in a fair bit too on this journey of self-discovery. I’ve done the unthinkable and switched from a Canon system to a Nikon system (a story I’ll leave for another day). I’ve bought a smaller non-DSLR camera. I stopped photographing for a long time, and at times only just played the role of a lighting assistant. I’ve gotten inspired by the books written by Joe Mcnally. I’ve taken short trips out of the city. Like I’ve said, it truly is a journey.

I have to admit I’m not quite there yet when it comes to being able to define myself as a photographer. I’ve been through all the phases I’ve described and more. As it stands, I just want to enjoy my photography. I can’t yet put into a clear perspective what my relationship is with photography. All I know, is that it’s a real passion, and I can spend hours doing it. But it does not mean I’ve gotten close enough to define myself yet.

To be able to achieve such photographic nirvana in itself will be a sense of achievement. It’s akin to finding your purpose or aim when you get lost in a barrage of distractions, decisions, and many other things in what we call ‘life’.

You see, once you’re able to define yourself as a photographer, no matter where photography takes you, no matter how many lows you go through, you will always have a direction to fall back on. You will know what drives you, and why you photograph. That little bit of light at the end of the tunnel, or so they say. The little spark to keep you going.

So I encourage you, yes you, to have a think about it, perhaps when you’re in Phase 4, and are going through a lull. What drives you as a photographer? What makes you different? What makes you… you? That answer, when you do find it, will be enough to keep you going, and I hope make you an even better photographer.

As for now, I’m still on this journey. Care to join me?

Photography Is A Journey

Phase 1 – The Possibilities are Limitless
Phase 2 – The Gear What-Ifs
Phase 3 – The Official Assignment
Phase 4 – The Photographic Lull
Phase 5 – Defining The Photographer In You

I’ve basically outdone myself and just broken down photography into 3 phases, and so let’s do a recap.

In Phase 1, it’s all about the possibilities, the sheer excitement of owning a DSLR and being able to take wonderful imagery. Then in Phase 2, we progress to getting very involved with the technicalities, and the ‘wanting to get more gear’ ideas. Then in Phase 3, we take it up a notch and get involved in the first official event as an appointed photographer.

Now, right up to this point, some photographers tend to find themselves getting caught up between Phase 2 and 3. The journey also does intertwine with Phase 1 since this phase’s various possibilities will drive you towards different equipment’s uses in Phase 2 and open doors for more opportunities in Phase 3. Generally, it means that there will be more shoots, and more gear, until finally you have all the gear you feel you want to get. So you keep shooting more, and more, and more… and not to mention, continue to find justifications to any new gear you acquire.

Then one fine day it happens. You feel uninspired. You run out of things to shoot. You start feeling a little down. Perhaps one event too many and you start to lose track of why you do this. Why do you do photography? The next job feels like a chore. The invitation from a fellow friend just starting photography to shoot a place you’ve already done twice over, and you can only stifle a yawn. The irony is, this phase, The Photographic Lull can happen if you’ve been shooting thousands of frames recently, or even when you’ve shot only a handful in the past few months. The bottom line is the whole feeling of deflation and the lack of inspiration.

It is one of the many lows most of us photographers go through. And it’s hard to pick ourselves up from this. And very often, at times like this, we do the strangest things. Examples include shooting with an iPhone, taking photos with toy cameras, dabbling with film for the first time, taking random photowalks, revisiting an old photographic flame, just to name a few.

There are many self, home-cooked remedies to this. One thing I’ve personally found to work wonders is to go back and look at old shots that you took yourself over the course of your journey. Particularly the old favorites or the ones that others complimented you for. Somehow that in itself, sometimes lights up enough of a flicker within you, that you find a new spark of inspiration. Or at the very least gives you a tad bit of a confidence boost. And then you find that little bit of drive to keep on going on this journey.

It could even be attending a workshop, or meeting new people in the photography business. Shootfest was one such opportunity. And it worked its wonders for me as well.

Sometimes there are those who don’t find this little spark. Unfortunately as a result of this, the drybox sees your camera gear a lot more than you do. And it may come to pass that you may never pick it up again to shoot like you used to.

But it’s not all doom and gloom for all. To some, it becomes a bit of soul searching. If you’re passionate enough about photography, somehow or rather, you’d be able to drag yourself out of the little rut, even if in desperation, and try and find a new challenge.

That in itself is not something to belittle. And very often, this passion will drive you to the next phase in this journey. And it’s one I’ve not yet reached. But I do know what I’d like to call it.

It’s called: Defining The Photographer In You.

Photography Is A Journey

Phase 1 – The Possibilities are Limitless
Phase 2 – The Gear What-Ifs
Phase 3 – The Official Assignment
Phase 4 – The Photographic Lull
Phase 5 – Defining The Photographer In You

The learning continues, and you now have probably your original camera set up, and a second lens, and perhaps a flash unit. Phase 2: The Gear What-Ifs will still reside in memory, but very soon, a contact will start to notice how into photography you are. And right about this time, you will receive an invitation. The conversation will go somewhere along the lines of the following:

Friend: Hey I notice you’re into photography. Saw your photos, they’re nice.
You: Thanks, yes, it’s really fun. Still learning.
Friend: I see. Hey I have this friend of mine having a wedding/event this weekend, would you be interested to come and shoot for it?
You: *Lips quiver with excitement, and you try your best to contain it* (and obviously in your subtle/obvious/reluctant/enthusiastic manner, you agree)

And there you have it. Phase 3: The Official Assignment; the invitation to be a guest photographer for someone’s wedding, or someone’s event.

The excitement and nerves are hard to contain. You start asking friends whether or not they’ve done weddings/events. Sometimes you find a contact who’s a freelancer, or a semi-pro, or maybe even a professional and you ask them too. You start doing your research, and then you start panicking.

Why?

Because suddenly you realise that the flash you didn’t buy yet from Phase 2, or the lenses that pros use for wedding/events are not the ones you own. And to make matters worse, a high number of people that you know whom are knowledgeable enough, will tell you to invest in a lens or a flash or something pretty pricey. Think things like f/2.8, IS/VR, primes, flash etc.

Right around this time, you usually end up doing one of the following options:

Option 1: Buy a new lens/flash
Option 2: Borrow equipment from a friend
Option 3: Wing it, and just go with the flow with what you have

No matter which option you take, you will very likely still go through this phase. But after making your decision, you start to focus on other photographers’ works covering similar scenarios. You start doing your homework. And with that, you take a deep breath, and dive straight in.

The wedding/event will go by in a flash, you’d likely have taken a few hundred shots in under 2 hours. You would have taken a few shots of each just to be safe. And you’d be running high on adrenaline. This is the stuff that people live for… the adrenaline rush. Depending on how well the shoot went, you may even think of doing this more often.

You may hit a brand new high. You may find your calling. Or maybe you won’t. Maybe you go home and realize, “Holy crap, my shots didn’t come out so great.” You may instead find that you are going to have to spend hours doing post processing to save the images that are key. Or you may even console yourself that this is your first shoot, so you believe you can do better.

Very likely, this phase will feed your gearhead tendencies if you have any, and you will start wanting professional gear, and the better camera. It will also be somewhat of a reality check, possibly even a humbling process. There is a chance you’ll get a handful of excellent shots, and you will start thinking, “Hey, this isn’t so hard, I can do this too!” Or you may go “Wow, I have no idea how the pros do it.” Either way with the experience under your belt, you may revert back to Phase 2 and again back to Phase 3 and do this on repeat till you’ve gotten all the gear your heart desires.

Or you reach Phase 4. This I call The Photographic Lull.

Photography Is A Journey

Phase 1 – The Possibilities are Limitless
Phase 2 – The Gear What-Ifs
Phase 3 – The Official Assignment
Phase 4 – The Photographic Lull
Phase 5 – Defining The Photographer In You