Now where is the damn focus peaking!?!

Indeed it would be Bart. Agree with everything you said especially the pre-visualization!

Mike

Plenty of comparisons were made between the different functions and features of the cameras, especially the viewfinders and control layouts. Those are the most significant differences between these cameras. Honestly the difference in image quality is negligible and the Olympus was a pre-production model. Though I do appreciate your curiousness about the image quality, it wouldn’t have been very interesting to put up a bunch of test charts that all looked similar.

In our opinion at the end of the day, photography isn’t about shooting brick walls or scientific test charts, but if you are interested in that kind information, there is plenty of it out there on the internet. We want to do something different by talking about practical information that real photographers care about.

Additionally these are not point and shoot cameras and do not come with a safety wrist strap. Typically these mirrorless cameras like DSLRs would use a normal neck strap.

Next time you in NJ I would love to come see how an old pro “does it” Please let me know when you are in the area.

-MZ

Clearly, no lens category is objectively best for all situations – but for learning how to previsualize and become “one with the camera” there really isn’t any way to go but prime. Hopefully DSLR makers will begin to see the 30mm APS-C prime would make an awesome kit lens.

Interrestig review. But where can I download the 5D3 files (RAW and JPEG).

Regards,

Then hire a printer salesman to run the company.

Then bankruptcy. Didn’t see that coming.

So if you wanted the equivalent of a 35mm (or Full Frame dumb term) 50mm lens you had to use a 25mm lens thus though the mm size was different, the angle of a 25mm Olympus lens would be exactly the same as a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera.

The use of the term crop sensor wasn’t even in the vernacular at the time the E-1 came out. There is no need for this conversation if you are using lenses which are made for your camera on your camera.

I sometimes shoot with a Rolleiflex 2.8 is that a multiple frame (3.4285 times larger then a 35mm slide) sensor compared to a 35mm slide? Really? This conversation seems to me to be a marketing technique more then a serious photographic science. The only reason this term was invented was to promote a line of cameras as superior to others. Instead of companies bragging at how good their chips are because of size, how about they work on improving their ability to capture light.

-MZ

Diana Liang
Baby Photographer
Lansing, MI

I believe that only the 1-series Canon DSLRs can store multiple Custom WB settings. So yes for each time you change lighting situations, you will need to re-measure WB.

MZ

That is a great question. Based on the situation you described, the best you can do “in-camera” is to get your neutral target in the source that will be the most “dominant” As most of the photo will then be corrected.

If there is a point where two separate lighting sources (and color temperatures) that are “mixing” in a certain area, it may be valuable to make a custom measurement in that specific spot, but there is no “magic bullet” for set white balance to be neutral for ALL three vastly different lighting sources.

Another solution is to light the room yourself with strobes/monolights so you can overpower the other lighting sources so they will not register in your images. That is probably the best, but of course, the least practical solution.

-MZ

-MZ

However, only 18-55 lens, 50mm prime lens on the market

I think, lenses were produced with different properties can be sold quite well

Your suggestion about shooting RAW is a good one too. It is true you will be able to “pull” more shadow and highlight detail out of your images.

However underexposing at high ISOs is never a good idea as trying to increase exposure in post production will introduce a LOT of noise, even on the highest end cameras.

Still in a pinch, its better than not getting the shot!

MZ

another consideration is to shoot with manual settings as often as possible. the camera’s “sport” settling is a helper, frequently not the answer when you are pushing the envelope.

terry

I do agree with many of the statements you make regarding a great deal of effects on the pictures that are simply intended to hide bad photography. To me good wedding photography is more than the right style and good exposure. It’s about making a positive connection with the bride/groom on their wedding day. It’s being able to laugh when they laugh and being able to feel what her dad feels when he walks down the aisle with his little girl by his arm. Show them that you care about their wedding day and a let her eyes and smile speak aloud in every shot you take.

The Grate MultiDesigner.

What I Can see on paper its an amazing Camera.

/Hej

Fact is if one requires more than 18mp (which is perfectly capable of printing up to 48″, perhaps they should be looking for a medium format type device.

Nice to also see the improved 400,000 cycle shutter, and an improvement on blackout. Hopefully, time to deliver will actually be end of March! Lets keep our fingers crossed. I know our journalists will love this camera. Great combination of speed, autofocus and decent enough megapixel for print. Lets see what the real world tests return though.

Excellent on Canon! Looking foward to your new camera!

BUT when I show off advanced DSLR technology in the store, that is my goto camera… not only because i know how to use it, but that and a 400 2.8 shows the true picture of what a solid high quality piece of camera equipment feels like

You make a good point about the ultra wide adapter, but I haven’t tried it yet. Generally those adapters don’t have as high image quality as a standard lens.

1) The exposure metering in aperture priority mode is accurate. Put it this way though, there is nothing easy to “change on the fly” on the NEX C3. Mostly everything requires going into a menu. You may want to throw the camera on the ground.

2) The 16mm f/2.8 is a good lens, but I would compare it more to a Nikon 24mm f/2.8 fixed lens on an FX sensor. It isn’t an ultra-wide like the lenses you listed. As usual, a fixed lens has less distortion than a zoom. Also the small size of this lens make it intriguing.

3) There is no shutter lag, but again this is contrast detect AF, not phase detect so it is slower. As far as changing AF modes and focus points, you have to access this through a menu. Though I think there is a way to change focus points using the dial. Its something I’ll have to look into, which means it isnt very intuitive.

Given that fact, it could make sense for one to carry around their usual DSLR fitted out with their favorite portrait lens, and have easy access to landscape-maker without switching lenses.

A few questions, if you don’t mind:

1. How easy is it for this camera to be used in Aperture Priority mode? To that end, is it easy to set the camera buttons to change ISO and aperture, and still change focus and metering modes on the fly, without wanting to throw the camera on the ground?

2. What do you think about the image quality of the 16mm 2.8 relative to, say, the Sigma 10-20 3.5 or Tokina 11-16 2.8?

3. How easy is it to choose focus points and achieve focus accuracy? Also, is there any shutter lag?

Thanks again for such an informative test.

I agree that would be a dream camera, but I think the longer zoom lens and larger sensor would drive up the price to about $750-$1,000. I wouldn’t mind paying it if it worked flawlessly and had nice Full HD video with manual controls.

MZ

Larger sensor for much better noise control
Get rid of the optical viewfinder
Full HD video at 24,30 and 60 fps with full manual control
Control ring as seen on s95 and s100.
Slightly smaller/thinner.
Gps
8-10x optical zoom

$499

Without getting too much into what I’m going to write about next week, Canon has always been a leader, not a follower. This is evident in their creation of the entire EOS line. They did something unconventional and took a major risk by ditching their entire mount (used to be the old FD mount) and changing to EF. However it paid off for them several times over and is a major reason why they are still #1.

While its entirely possible that Canon will play its hand conservatively and come out with “just another mirrorless camera”, I think they will be doing something a little bit different. So far I don’t think any of the MILCs are perfect, maybe Canon will get it right?

-MZ

-MZ

The main difference is that it has a higher mAh. For further comparisons check out this website http://www.eneloop.info/products/batteries.html

The Tamron 70-300 VC has better stabilization than the Canon 70-300 IS (non L) and much more precise AF (at least with the copies I had) and a non-rotating front that makes using polarizers less of a hassle.

The build is also clearly better than the Canon as well.

I didn’t get to compare them at the same time so it’s a harder to compare image quality. It’s possible that each wins at certain focal lengths and apertures in the center. The Tamron is sharper at the edges though on FF bodies for sure. The Tamron has better overall contrast above 250mm but maybe sometimes gets a little halation wide open if there is lots of sun glare on the subject which I don’t recall from the Canon.

With the much better AF and build and the somewhat better image stabilization and probably at least equal image quality on APS-C and better on FF I think the win goes to the Tamron. Oh and the Tamron also hits higher apertures much higher up the focal range the 70-300 IS from Canon.

That said, unlike with the 17-50, I do feel that the Tamron does quite clearly lose to the more expensive L lenses in this case.

Both the 70-200 f/4 IS and 70-300 IS L from Canon focus a good 50% faster as well as somewhat more precisely than the Tamron on average.

The 70-200 f/4 IS compared to the Tamron 70-300 VC noticeably wins the image quality contest in the center at most apertures at all focal lengths other than near 70mm (where it actually seems to lose to the Tamron!). When stopped down a ways, the Tamron sometimes gets close though at certain focal lengths and it more often gets close to the L at the edges on FF. It appears to slightly beat the 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC at 280mm. But the L definitely has better image quality and constant f/4 and faster/slightly better AF so I think it clearly wins the 70-200 zoom contest between the two and even counting 70-280/300 range I think it is surely better overall (if you don’t mind swapping TC on and off, granted that can be a major pain and lead to missed shots, etc; and slightly worse quality at the near 280mm range).

The 70-300 IS L has equal or better image quality than Tamron at all apertures at all focal lengths. The biggest differences are center and mid-frame near wide open where the L lens often wins quite noticeably. As with the other L it never gets any of the halation under glaring direct sun and it has better micro-contrast for more bite. At the edges on FF or in the center/mid-frame when well stopped down the Tamron does appear to just manage to equal the L at a couple focal lengths though.

I found the 70-300L to have the most CA at 70mm of the three but to be the sharpest there nonetheless.

From very roughly 100mm-175mm the 70-200 f/4 IS was the sharpest with the 70-300L coming in second. The 70-300L was generally quite close though other than near 135mm.

At 200mm the 70-300L was tiny bit sharper and had somewhat less CA then the 70-200 f/4 IS.

At 280mm the 70-300L had the least CA and was the sharpest.

The 70-200 f/4 IS obviously has a faster aperture over most of the 70-200 range than the Tamron or 70-300L.

The 70-200 f/4 IS is the longest but the 70-300L is the heaviest. All three are still small and light enough to be good stash way travel lenses that could fit even in cargo pants side pockets, just barely, unlike the 70-200 2.8 lenses.

So while the L lenses do cost a lot more, I do think that in this case they clearly are the better lenses, featuring both better AF and image quality (and faster aperture in one case) than the Tamron. Of course the price differential is large and may be too much for some. But if you pay more you will get more in this case.

The advantages of using the 105 2.8 over the 18-105 are numerous, mainly that you can shoot at lower aperture openings if you desire to.

The 18-105 DX is a nice lens for what it is, but has limitations. At 105 the maximum aperture opening is f/5.6.

The 105 f/2.8G VR Micro Nikkor is one of Nikon’s sharpest lenses as well.

I hope you have a good time at the botanical gardens. Send us some shots (mikez@uniquephoto.com) if you get any really nice ones.

-MZ

I agree. If you use the camera that way, it is very nice to use that way, but how is it possible to get anything in focus if you believe the DOF scale is off?

For your sake and everyone else that shoots in a similar style, I hope there is a fix ASAP too.

-MZ

I would go with the t2i, right now it is one of the best “bang for your buck” cameras out there, whereas the X100 is more of a luxury camera with a lot more limitations.

-MZ

You can see a few things I’ve shot with it so far, I plan to shoot my next feature film on it.

Hope that helps.

Regards,

We sell the Fuji X100 for $1,200, not $1,500.

The S95 is in a totally different class, it is one of the better pocket cameras, but it can’t keep up with the E-PL1/2, never-mind the X100. In my E-PL1 review I compared the E-PL1 to the G11, D3000, and Rebel XS. It shows this pretty clearly.

You do make a compelling argument about the the E-PL1 and E-PL2 though. I will do a direct comparison. Matt Sweetwood, the President of Unique Photo is a huge fan of the PEN cameras so I am sure he will be happy to participate.

Stay Tuned.

-MZ

-MZ

-MZ

-MZ

I’ll add more as time goes by – but until then we’ll still be using the Olde’ School Cameras!

I remember back at school people were using Avid for their films sometimes, but I haven’t heard much about it since. My goal is to learn all of them and more about aesthetics in video/audio. I will start with Premiere and see what happens

Thanks for your input/wisdom.

I will look more into the “whys” theory of editing, do you have any good resources?

All the things you mentioned are worth having. I wonder, though, if huge megapixel counts (and their resulting big file) are all that valuable to most users. I can already make very large prints from my APC chip sized 50D. If the price isn’t significantly higher than the departing Mark II, I can live with that. (A big “if”, I bet.)

Good update – thanks.

Also thanks for mentioning the HD output through HDMI, forgot about that!

-MZ

If they really are moving to a single 1D body lineup, the specs of the 5D3 may say a lot about what they intend to do with their flagship series.

For infrared film, B/W can be found, but color infrared is basically gone.

Thanks

rlbaker665

Thank you for your supportive comments. I am glad you found the Sony DSLR school useful. The technology in the new DSLR/DSLT cameras is the main reason we started to carry Sony products. They are very innovative. I look forward to more of your comments and seeing you here at the store!

Some extra info on the A700 replacement is starting to leak out. Sony has confirmed it will be a translucent mirror camera. A lot of people online seem to think it will have a 24 Megapixel sensor and ISO settings into the “hundreds of thousands” Granted these numbers seem extreme, but it wouldn’t surprise me. Sony is trying to change the game.

And as far as the coffee goes, it is great and I wouldn’t be able to survive without it haha!

-Mike Z

TOM

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/blog-post/1936371/polaroid-kills-polaroid

I am glad I am not the only one who has the same take on this issue.

When I found out they were making these announcements at CES, I thought they would be making a comeback in the industry. Products such as the One-Step did become a household name… And I thought thats where they were going with this, trying to take back that market.

I agree the products will probably be relatively successful because Lady Gaga is huge right now, especially in the demographic you mentioned.

Again thank you so much for your input and hopefully I will see you back here in the comment zone again sometime!

-Mike Z

But I have to say that I disagree with you on some points. First of all, I think the industrial design of the GL10 printer is a complete abomination, and the GL30 camera isn’t much better. The GL20 sunglasses don’t look very comfortable, but for what they are their design seems to suit them.

I feel like you’ve set the bar a little high. How often do companies release a revolutionary product that people are still going to be talking about in 20 years from now? I think Polaroid’s main concern is releasing a line of products that a decent number of people will purchase and enjoy. And to me it looks like they’ve at very least come close to this goal.

It’s easy to cry gimmickry at goofy futuristic cyber sunglasses and the obviousness of the GL30′s approach. But I think they did the right thing by working with Gaga on these designs. I’m sure a lot of money is changing hands in this deal, but there seems to be an air of sincerity here. I honestly think that Lady Gaga wanted products like these, and did what she had to do to get them. While they may not appeal to you or I, there are millions upon millions of screaming fourteen year old Gaga devotees that will likely have a different opinion.

Someone over at Polaroid just needs to build up the nerve to step forward and override Gaga’s final say on the industrial design, because those boxes are U.G.L.Y.

Polaroid tried to stir up speculation for a new film camera by removing the zink badge from the “teaser” image: http://www.petapixel.com/2010/12/03/polaroid-teaser-for-ces-2011-points-at-new-instant-camera/

It sounds like the issue(s) you are having are calibration related. You need a device like the Spyder or ColorMunki to correctly profile your display, but if the prints are THAT off, it sounds like a printer/paper profile issue.

What kind of paper are you using? Each paper has a specific profile for the PIXMA 9000. Also what software are you using to print with?

Let me know so I can help you further!

-MZ

I hope you learn all about photography this year! Please feel free to contact me if you need any help.

-MZ

-MZ

Thanks,
Dennis Guillaume

What is the most reliable approach to get color dependably synchronized on this equipment? It appears the main issue is between the computer and printer?? Downloaded photos look reasonable on the monitor but not when printed. (It takes many adjustments to even get close to the photo on the monitor let alone the subject itself) .

Would be grateful for you tips, Ed

PS: The printer is operating well. Head alignment and nozzles are in good shape.

The biggest point I was trying to make is that the D7000 is an upgrade from the D90, but not as much of an upgrade as the D90 was from the older D80. The D90 was a monumental breakthrough in advanced-amateur cameras, which is why it’s still one of the top selling cameras. It will probably be another 2 years before we see that kind of breakthrough/innovation again.

Best of luck!

MZ

Do you think Polaroid was counting on the Impossible Project to have more film done by now? Maybe we will hear more about this new one-step if the IP can actually deliver.

Best,

Mike Z

As for The Impossible Project, they plan on releasing a brand new color film in March 2011 for Polaroid 600 cameras.

There isn’t a day that goes by without someone asking for 600 film on the Polaroid FaceBook page.

- Michael Raso
producer / host, The FIlm Photography Podcast Internet Radio Show
http://filmphotographypodcast.com/

“Reading output of Live Mos sensor is 60P.
Live Mos sensor is working “progressive”.
At Venus FHD, it is converted into 60i(This is according to the official AVCHD spec)”

But I’ve got a question that is crucial for me before switching from (hacked) GH1 to GH2.

Is the 1080 50/60i mode really interlaced, or as the sensor outputs progressive, is it some 50p with 2 half frames wrapped in a interlaced container ? I mean are the half frames taken at the same time, or is there a time shift as in a normal interlaced mode ?

Thanks for your help !

________________
Etienne Jacquemart

Trying to get together a community of S95 shooters so we can figure out all the nooks and crannies of this machine. Check it out: http://s95site.com/forum

It will for sure work nicely for my led lights which is hard for most cameras.

-Mike Z

http://www.chassimages.com/forum/index.php/topic,99238.msg1717693.html#msg1717693

CU…;)

A lot of people have been saying my review is inaccurate so I am glad someone else will be verifying my claims. Please do send me the link or post it here.

Don't worry your English is understandable haha!

Best,

Mike Z

So, for me, on my 550D, it wil be a good alternative because Canon 70-200 IS II is a little to expensive for a non-professional use (2049€ = 2608USD)

About the quality of this lens, a french guy made a great job by comparating the 2 Titans (Nikon VR2/Canon IS II) with this new Sigma. His first conclusions are that this Sigma is a GREAT lens.

He will publish the whole comparison tonight or tomorrow in one of the biggest french photo forums.
If it's ok for you, I will send you the link, when published. If not, "Google is your friend…;D

Sorry for my bad english…

Greets from Belgium…;)

I appreciate your views and for some people only the best will do. Perhaps a better way to phrase my thoughts are that this lens is a good alternative to version 1 of the Nikon or Canon 70-200 lenses.

I agree the price has to drop more before it becomes a good "value" when compared to the version 2 Canon or Nikon.

Thanks for your comments. Trust me I like when people disagree with me. It gives us something to talk about!

Best,

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to write this review but I have to disagree with your conclusions, especially that the new Sigma is a good way to save a few bucks.

-MZ

With Sony working on a NEW version of their 24MP sensor that was used in the D3x, I can't see a D700x being released.

In an ideal world there would be a dual refresh in January of the D700 (before being replaced down the road at some point) with 1080p video and one model with the D3s sensor and the other with a D3x sensor.

One could argue the D3x 24MP sensor is more realistic because it's in high abundance and Nikon has had a problem producing enough D3s cameras, how would they make another model with the same sensor?

However I think by January there will be plenty of D3s cameras on store shelves and possibly a D700s.

tnt – It's possible, but unlikely.

Glad to hear you own all of the PEN cameras. I just prefer the control wheels on the E-P2, but as you can tell I really enjoyed the E-PL1.

I would love to see some of your shots and feature them on the blog. Let me know if you are interested.

-Mike Z

I am a very serious photographer, and owned all 3 Pens. Go for E-PL1 with EVF if really serious, E-P2/E-P1 for casual stuff.

Great to hear from you and I am glad you are reading the blog. Thanks for the encouragement. Rick's class will be awesome!

I will have to test out the NIK software when I have a chance, thanks for the tip.

I agree that setup is great. The 17mm makes the camera even more compact.

It brings back memories of shooting an old film rangefinder. While the VF-2 is nice, there's nothing like a bright gorgeous optical viewfinder.

-MZ

I mostly use it with the 17mm, so VF-1 helps to fight direct sunglare on the screen, which is the camera's limit, unless you buy the expensive VF-2.

Am.

BLOGitsePHOTOS

Two of my friends are waiting for the IV's to come to our country. I'll be more than glad to to show them this review. We don't want to switch to Nikon, so this is great hehe.

Thanks again.

Lucy

http://dataentryjob-s.com

As for the 1.3x crop versus full frame argument…it is nice to get a bit of extra reach with the long lenses, but if the Mark IV had a full frame sensor at 16MP, you would be able to crop and get a comparable file size to the D3s. I personally believe that full frame sensors are the future, and that the APS-H 1.3x crop format will eventually die out.

As for autofocus, the Canon 1D series has always been faster than the Nikon D series. While the Mark III had its own set of issues, the pure speed of the focusing and its ability to acquire and track a subject is faster than Nikon. Not to say that Nikon is slow, in fact it is quite speedy, but that is where Canon has its edge. This remains true on the 1D Mark IV vs. D3s argument. While the D3s is scary-fast, the Mark IV still bests it. Both cameras are fantastic, and I would not encourage someone owning a full set of Canon lenses to switch to Nikon or vice versa.

Thanks again for all your responses, I welcome all suggestions, comments, and thoughts about the article and my testing/processes, feel free to email me anytime at joshl@uniquephoto.com

Josh Lehrer

The 5D Mark II is supposes to be better on noise than the Mark IV…

Thanks
Kay

Canon has better resolution and reach due to 1,3 sensor.
Nikon gives better low light/ high iso performance.
It is everybody´s own decision which one to choose.

Thank you for sharing the article!

–Thomas

As far as Canon having the edge in focus speed – thats a tricky one. Having tried both cameras it boils down to "milliseconds" difference. Almost imperceptible. Not to mention that we are dealing with a 300mm Canon lens vs a 400mm Nikon. Perhaps the lens influence ones perception of focus speed.

That being said I don't think any working pro would have trouble producing amazing images from either camera.

The C VS N competition is great for everyone!

Thanks for the comments. I understand your point about a 400mm f/2.8 being more expensive than a 300mm f/2.8 for someone who has to purchase their own equipment and/or isn't going to make a living using it.

However many pros will spend whatever it costs to have the gear they need and are often supplied with equipment by their employer.

Relatively speaking, you are correct, having more than 6400 ISO may seem excessive, but with a native setting of 12,800 ISO on the D3s, 6400 will look that much better.

Additionally I believe this test is very fair. While the cameras have different size sensors, they are in the same price range and are both designed for the same kind of photographers.

Canon clearly didn't win even at 6400 ISO, but win is a subjective term. If you don't need to go past a certain ISO and you benefit from the 1.3x size sensor (as you mentioned), then the Canon makes sense. If low light performance is your top priority, the D3s has an edge.

Both of these cameras are so impressive that a pro Nikon OR Canon shooter would be happy with either body. Obviously what lenses you have access to is a major factor as well.

There have been internet rumors for a long time about a Canon 3D and it would be nice, but there is nothing to solid to even begin speculating when a release date would be.

Thanks.

-Mike Zawadzki

buy r4 dsi

For years it was the war of the megapixels. Who had the better resolution, CMOS vs CCD image sensors, even down to the selection of lenses and other available accessories. Based on the design of a Nikon N80, Fuji’s S series digital SLR’s always were compatible with Nikon’s F-mount and it’s flashes, so there was never a true lacking of options available like many Canon shooters would declare against Nikon shooters. But each side acknowledged the colors and skin tones out of the Fuji Digital SLR’s were phenomenal.

Part of this greatness came from the fact Fuji’s SLR’s had a very high dynamic range making it popular for wedding and portrait photographers. The dress of the bride would not only be the perfect shade of white, but the details and contrasts of the dress were still clear and clean. This was made by possible by Fuji designing the cameras to have 2 sensors inside for both the high and low ranges.

Many saw this at first as a negative. “It’s not a 12 megapixel camera, it’s just a camera with two 6 megapixel sensors,” would be a phrase you would hear many say. Even if that were the truth (which many do believe still to this day) it was still a perfect balance of color and detail that higher megapixel sensors could not pick up.

Now that the S5, the last designed digital SLR from Fuji is no longer available on store shelves many aspiring and current photographers are looking to get one while they still can. For prices nearly 60% off the original asking price photographers find themselves fortunate enough to have grabbed possibly one of the last great wedding cameras.

Technology will eventually pick up where Fuji left off; maybe even Fujifilm will be the company to do it. But for those like myself waiting for the return of value to digital SLR’s with exceptional dynamic range that make us long for the days of results of film, we might just have to wait a little longer.

My opinion, is that this is something that needed to be done. By following one idea and with one announcement the photographers in question were able to shine an international spotlight on a situation that needed to be addressed, regardless of how it was captured. As well as a light on those who are supposedly the benchmark for what is good and bad along with right and wrong in photography today.

Is staging photographs wrong, … well in some cases no. This was a contest, there was prize money and if they didn't declare it was staged it would be wrong. But they did say it was wrong, they admitted what they did wrong and proved how the integrity of the contest was in doubt, but raised awareness of a subject that was not getting nearly enough attention.

As a photographer, you stage photographs all the time whether it be in your mind or right in front of you. They had no obligations or ethics to follow other then their own in this case. If this were to be a report with journalistic properties for a publication, yeah this was wrong. No doubt about it. You report the truth, you don't stage the truth to get points across. This contest on the other hand, was artistic expression and interpretation. They did that, and they did it well.

Kodachrome is unique that unlike other E-6 based slide films with a 2 developer process K-14 (Kodachrome) actually had a 4 developer process which helped it become one of the best archival films in history. Without other dyes or agents involved, once developed the cell itself was not prone to any deterioration of color.

It was this process that made Kodachrome such a choice for professional photographers everywhere. Like paintings, photographic colors fade in time due to the elements, however Kodachrome set a new benchmark for archival quality. In testing it was calculated that the least stable color, yellow, would suffer only a 20% loss of dye in 185 years after development. Considering how valuable photographs were during the early portions of the 20th century, you can imagine that having such a long life was paramount to professionals as well as anyone looking to pass on family history.

Preservation of color and quality is one thing; the ability to capture and create such color and quality made Kodachrome the preferred choice for professional photographers everywhere. Kodachrome was the standard issue for photographers for worldwide press publications such as National Geographic. Many of the most famous images of all time were shot on Kodachrome 64 including Steve McCurry’s legendary shot “Afghan Girl” which has been one of the staples of Kodachrome 64.

The film provided a range that is impressive even today in the digital age by boasting nearly 8 full stop dynamic range. And even in this digital age we live in today, Kodachrome continues to hold the quality equal to or superior to many of today’s digital SLR cameras. With the proper equipment, it has been estimated that the color and quality from a hi-res scan of a Kodachrome slide would be equivalent to roughly 20 megapixels from a digital sensor.

Second only to maybe a yellow box, people immediately associate Kodak with Kodachrome. They associate pictures of family. They remember pictures that shaped the majority of their lives. Kodachrome will always be part of pop culture (Paul Simon’s “Kodachrome”) and through the memories it helped create.

Unique Photo will be receiving the new Olympus E-P1 in a variety of kits, order today!

http://tinyurl.com/nhdtea

With the power of the internet, it is easy to see how images like the one shown here, can be quickly distributed world wide. And thanks to advances in technology, it is quite obvious some work was done to give the media outlets of the world a different perception of an event then really occurred.

Granted, all media outlets do this as well for concerts, events, etc. But given the political climate of the Middle East right now and a "free election" process, this brings a whole new level of journalistic integrity and manipulation into question.