Having been very connected to my Olympus E-1 lately, I decided it was high time to take out another old digital camera in the Nikon D40. I don’t always get the chance to engage in street photography but when I do it can be a lot of fun. It does require a different approach though – being on the look-out for likely scenes and waiting for the right moment. The D40 isn’t exactly a classic street machine but it’s also small enough not to be much of a bother unless a big lens is attached, like the Tamron 17-50 2.8 I decided to go with!
Reaching for the stars – Nikon D40, ISO 200, F 2.8
I find that the D40 makes really nice photos, but the CCD sensor technology isn’t so great when you have to pull details out of heavy shadows during editing. The RAW files are flexible enough, but the heavy shadow areas can be a bit thin. These older sensors also aren’t so great at retaining highlights either, so you have to make the choice – expose for shadows or highlights when the lighting creates dynamic range that’s outside of the scope of the camera. This is similar to slide film.
Framed by yellow – Nikon D40
Even though there’s noise in shadow areas when you pull up the exposure during editing, the digital noise pattern isn’t objectionable. This is one area where CCD sensors had a clear advantage over their CMOS counterparts at the time – lower noise and a finer noise pattern. We seem to have come a long way since those early digital days, but cameras like the D40 still make perfectly excellent photos! How far have we really come, one might wonder?
Free hugs – Nikon D40
There’s also another nice advantage to using an old camera like this – 6 megapixels pairs really well even with a kit lens that doesn’t see a lot of love. The old 18-55mm Nikkor kit lens is much maligned but is nicely sharp on an old camera like this, since it out-resolves the 6 megapixel sensor. My Tamron looks even better and seems to pick up plenty of primary colours wide open. Still a perfectly excellent camera.
The clouds are slowly dissipating after several months of grey days. This weekend provided an opportunity to drive around the vibrant towns of the Murray River. I packed my bag with the Olympus E-1, Nikon Z5, and the Sony RX100.
I continue to be impressed with the output from the old E-1, but dynamic range is limited, and careful consideration of a scene is required before clicking the shutter button, I’ve discovered.
Shadows on emerald metal – Olympus E-1
Window of opportunity
Every digital sensor (and film, of course) has a limited performance window within which it can optimally render the dynamic range of a scene. If the dynamic range (brightest and darkest areas) of a scene exceed the window, then an exposure decision must be made: crush blacks or burn highlights? Modern sensors have a bigger window, so provide more latitude. The E-1, not so much.
Scenes with plenty of mid-tones and minimal strong highlights / deep shadows are good for this camera. Evenly lit scenes are great too. With excessive tonal ranges, I usually crush blacks because it’s less distracting for the eye, but it depends on how numerous the extreme tonal ranges are and the composition I’ve decided on.
Unused, catching dust and webs – Olympus E-1
The onboard tonal response of the Olympus is contrasty. Again, great for evenly lit scenes that could use a contrast bump, but not so great for extreme tonal ranges where pushing them further causes distracting visual elements. The more I use this camera, the better I get at evaluating scenes before picking the camera up. And if I can frame a scene and limit the extreme tonal ranges, I’ll do that. I also commonly dial in some negative Exposure Compensation to protect highlights but only when I want to preserve better gradation of tone over areas where distracting highlights could be a problem. Evenly lit scenes don’t need it unless that’s the look I’m going for.
Beneath the old machine – Olympus E-1
Calibrated for the old film pros?
It’s clear to me that the RAW files from the Olympus E-1 are different to the RAW files we get from modern cameras, but I don’t think this is a CMOS or CCD issue. The native tonal response of the E-1 produces files that are already contrasty and punchy. The images on this page are essentially the RAW output with barely any editing at all.
Some people might say I should use OM Workspace to get the colour goodness from this camera, but the software remains awful to use. And the few RAW files from the E-1 I’ve loaded into OM Workspace produce much the same initial result as the Adobe Standard profile in Lightroom, though my testing isn’t extensive enough to warrant strong views.
So, back to my speculation on the punchy files from the E-1. In 2003, when the camera was released, digital photography wasn’t mainstream. It’s entirely possible that early cameras like this were internally calibrated to produce images that were as close to certain film types as possible in terms of punchiness and also required less editing in software. Remember, there wasn’t a lot of RAW editing software around at the time.
None of that means these old cameras make filmic photos, but it may explain why there seem to be differences in output compared to our modern cameras. I think this is less about the inherent properties of a CCD sensor and more about what kinds of photos the film companies wanted us to see from their cameras via internal calibrations. Now that photo editing programs are numerous and commonplace, modern cameras that have more dynamic range than the E-1 are calibrated to output flat RAW files that can easily be edited. Just speculation, of course.
I’ve briefly mentioned elsewhere that I used film cameras growing up. They were nothing too special though. I think my last film camera was an APS (Advanced Photo System) camera from Fujifilm. I liked that this format offered features like extra frames, easy-loading, and panoramic view. In some ways, it was the easy-to-use precursor to digital. It didn’t last long in the camera world as photographers didn’t like the reduction in frame size or the noticeable grain due to the crop. The market take-up of digital was not too far behind either, so APS remains the last turn of the millennium gasp of companies trying to squeeze every final buck out of film.
Sometimes, photographers say they have a relationship with film. I suppose that you might have a fondness for it if photography had been a big part of your life growing up. For me, film cameras were just there for special occasions. I knew exactly one person who had any professional camera gear, and I never saw them use it. My parents were certainly never interested in cameras, other than to document birthdays and other events. Rarely, I might receive a 110 format camera, the aforementioned APS camera, or go out and buy one of the cheapo plastic disposables. The best 35mm film camera I ever owned was given to me by my late father – a Chinon with a tiny lens and auto-rewind. I used it for a while until the film motor broke down.
I didn’t nurture a passion for photography from a young age, partly due to not having the financial means or the inspiration around me. Some of it also has to do with the fact that I’ve never been very technically minded or confident in my ability to learn such things. I always saw high-end photography as the pursuit of those who could afford it and those who could understand the numbers behind it.
When I was gifted my first APS camera, I enjoyed the ease of the exercise. I probably made more photos with that camera than with any other previously. I’ve since lost those photos, but I do remember becoming very interested in framing scenes and doing so in a way that pleased me. I think this is when I really started to develop an interest in the wider world of photography, though my bank account wasn’t always up to the challenge.
Very OrangeSunset – Smena 8 with home-made redscale film
When digital cameras came along, I was pretty excited. Though my first was a Kodak with a measly 1 megapixel and terrible battery life, I loved the immediacy of the experience. There’s something to be said for waiting for film to develop and unwrapping it like a gift, but digital offered me the chance to learn how to make better photos through immediate feedback. That’s when things started to really make sense to me and my, up to that point, nebulous and undefined interest in photography solidified.
In my previous post, I spoke about the eerie ruins of the accommodation complex at Wycliffe Well. To the best of my knowledge, the large bush-fire in this area still rages uncontrolled. Such is the creation and destruction cycle of life in outback Australia. One day you’re listening to tourists recount stories about Min Min Lights and the next you’ve sold your long-term outback business and it now lies in ruins at the feet of new owners, unlikely to be repaired. Life moves on quickly and time is uncaring.
Anyone for the Ladies Toilets? – Nikon Z5
At this point in the road-trip, I was still getting used to the Nikon Z5. It’s a lovely camera, without doubt, but I need to get into the habit of choosing smaller F-stops to create a deeper depth of field when close to my subject. For many of these photos I used the excellent Nikkor 40mm F2 lens. I’m a sucker for prime lenses and this one is certainly good bang for the buck, despite the all-polycarbonate mount. It’s one sharp lens for sure!
House 2 – Nikon Z5
I also used the 52mm B+W Circular Polarising Filter. This helps to cut stray reflections and saturate the colours so editing isn’t so burdensome. But using the CPL is not for every occasion. It’s great for cutting reflections, deepening the colour of foliage, and good if you want to photograph water, but it does tend to make photos look a bit flat and unnatural at times. I find that I always need to add contrast during the editing process just to cut that flatness.
Your caravan awaits – Nikon Z5
As you can see, the skies also really come alive when using the CPL. Sometimes it’s a bit too much, honestly. One year, I remember using it extensively around Alice Springs and the skies looked so dark they were almost purple. Now, I twist the brass ring of the CPL until it hits maximum effect and then dial it back a little to add some natural reflection to the scene. I think I used it quite judiciously on this outback journey.
Welcome to the TV Room – Nikon Z5
The Z5 is very comfortable at ISO 6400 and I’m comfortable using it when required. I think I got away with ISO 3200 in the above photo and used Lightroom’s great AI-based noise reduction to smooth it all out. That’s a good use of AI technology, as far as I’m concerned. Really love that artwork too, though the TV has seen better days.
The Olympus E-1 is quickly becoming one of my favourite cameras. There’s a certain solidity to the photos from it. The mid-tones are strong and the tone curve applied in-camera produces really attractive images. If there’s anything to the CCD versus CMOS sensor argument, the E-1 is likely one of the best arguments for CCD being inherently superior. None of this is to suggest that modern cameras can’t produce amazing images, of course.
Crystal Lake – Olympus E-1
With my time currently limited, the fact that the RAW files from the E-1 require far less editing than expected is a big positive. And I still think that people are overpaying for cameras like this. It may be a really nice camera, but it lacks many of the niceties we’ve become accustomed to on our modern cameras. The limited dynamic range can be a problem in difficult lighting conditions and there’s no Histogram or highlight blinkies to check exposure. This does lead me to more carefully consider the tonal range of a scene and whether I use ESP or Spot metering, so it’s a good thing for learning, really.
Mine also has a few issues – a missing eye-cup and the mode dial is stuck in either Program mode or Manual mode. The eyepiece is not an issue but the mode dial is frustrating. I can live with it though. It does serve to remind me that this is an old camera now and it won’t last. Yet another reason not to overpay for old tech!
Table for Three – Olympus E-1
I’d also taken out the Finepix S5600 along with the E-1 in my camera bag, but once I opened up the Finepix files at the end of the day, I was disappointed. If I hadn’t been using the E-1 all day, the Finepix would likely have pleased me enough. But looking at those photos side by side, the E-1 completely blows the Finepix out of the water.
I feel a sense of melancholy when I use the E-1 though. Olympus isn’t the company it used to be, with the imaging arm now sold off and owned by OM Digital Solutions. The E-1 is every bit a lovely camera from a different time. It was a time when digital photography wasn’t quite yet mainstream and venerable companies like Olympus were putting every effort into the new digital market – enticing film shooters with the promise of not having to pay for film development.
I can’t help but feel that the E-1 contains as much technical mojo as Olympus could pour into it. The collaboration with Kodak represents the shared vision of two traditional companies focussed on surviving in a rapidly changing photography landscape. Ultimately, neither company managed to escape a brutal market where smartphone cameras defined the new rules, with severe decline causing them either to be sold off piece by piece or handed over to new owners divorced from company tradition.
It seems that every weekend is cloudy lately, but that’s not a bad thing when you have an old camera that doesn’t handle high dynamic range scenes well. I took out the Olympus E-1 recently and found it a really interesting device – it feels great and has the gentlest shutter sound I’ve ever heard. I had another opportunity to use it yesterday and set it to record RAW and JPG. The results surprised me.
Old Methodist Church – Olympus E-1
I’ve questioned the idea of CCD sensors rendering colour differently to their CMOS counterparts, but ultimately I couldn’t be entirely sure there was nothing going on. There really shouldn’t be, as digital imaging sensors themselves are colour-blind and it’s only the Colour Filter Array atop them that could influence colour, apart from usual suspects like White Balance and lens quality.
Imagine my surprise when I found that the RAW files from the E-1 look almost identical to the JPG and TIFF outputs, apart from some extra sharpening. Normally, you’d expect RAW files to look flatter and less saturated when contrasted to processed JPGs from the same camera, but this is not so with the E-1.
Strictly No Parking – Olympus E-1
I know that Lightroom applies a colour profile to each import, of course. I know that it does some sharpening and processing up-front to create a workable image. But what I’m finding with the E-1’s RAW files is that I don’t actually need to do much additional processing at all. The RAW files already look good and don’t look as flat as you’d expect a demosaicedfile to look. So, what’s happening? Why do the E-1’s ORF files (Olympus’ naming convention for RAW files) look so similar to the processed JPGs?
Keep Clear – Olympus E-1
I have a theory – I think the E-1 is not doing much JPG processing at all, apart from some sharpening. Where we’d normally see a flat RAW image and a punchy JPG file, I suspect the E-1 is converting the ORF and applying minimal processing. This may be why the files look similar.
Please bear in mind that none of this is scientific. I’ve not sat for hours and tested side-by-side photos. I also know that processors like Lightroom make substantial changes when importing photos. I write all this knowing that it’s simple first impression and could be an error in my perceptions/technical set-up. This is a journal and sometimes my thoughts meander, so please be kind!
Restricted – Olympus E-1
Back to Kodak Colour Science
I have my doubts about CCD sensors and their supposed inherent colour superiority. As I’ve said before, there are plenty of old junk CCD cameras out there too, so it may not be a property of the CCD sensor at all. Yet, I can’t help but think that there’s something interesting happening inside the Olympus E-1. There’s no doubt that in the right lighting conditions it can produce superb images.
So far, and I may be completely wrong here, the Olympus E-1 is the only digital camera I have that even comes close to the output of my Sigma DP2 Merrill camera (now with a sticky leaf shutter, sadly). That’s high praise, considering the Sigma uses a Foveon sensor – a very different image recording technology. Of course, when I say close, the E1’s photos are still not really like the Foveon produced images, but the E1 does have the feel of needing to be treated like a camera with old slide film loaded, where you have to really look after wide tonal ranges.
Old town waterways – Olympus E-1 with Zuiko 14-42 mm kit lens
It’s not as though my E-1 sports a spectacular lens that makes the photos look great. It’s the old Four-Thirds system Zuiko kit lens – 14-42 mm 3.5 to 5.6. Not that Zuiko lenses are poor at all, as even the so-called kit lenses are truly respectable. So, is there some Kodak colour science happening here? At the very least, it looks like a tone curve is being applied to create a punchier image and this is translated to the demosaicing process. I really don’t know what it is, but I’m certainly happy to keep using this camera. It may not replace my faulty Sigma, but it’s very satisfying to use.
When the Olympus E-1 was introduced in 2003, it was the first time a company had designed a camera exclusively for digital photography from the ground up. And the Olympus E-1 was, in every way, a camera designed for the pro digital photographer. Not only is it the best feeling camera I’ve ever held, it also features a dampened shutter sound that has been described by some as a soft hug. The sweet mechanical kiss of the, clearly over-engineered, shutter mechanism adds positively to the experience of using this chunky and well-made device.
Beyond grassy edges – Olympus E-1
Kodak Colour Science?
There’s some thought that the Kodak-made CCD digital sensor in the E-1 has some magical properties that produce amazing photos and amazing colour. It’s hard to comment on that, as I haven’t enough experience with it yet. However, I’m pretty certain that Olympus tweaked the on-board software to make some great looking photos so as to appeal to the professional film shooters of 2003 who were stubbornly holding onto their film stocks.
The photo above does look good after editing the TIFF file in Lightroom, and I didn’t need to do a lot of editing at all. You’ll see that highlights are easily burned out, so using negative Exposure Compensation to protect those highlights is a must-do in certain kinds of light. I recorded in-camera to TIFF format just to see if I could recover more detail from shadows and highlights. I was certainly successful at recovering plenty of shadow detail so it’s best to expose for the highlights and recover the shadows later.
Mostly in shadow – Olympus E-1
The Olympus E-1 is a very satisfying camera to use, and that’s mostly down to the ergonomics. Sporting a weather-sealed, thick magnesium-alloy body, the E-1 absolutely feels like a pro camera. Mine came with the old 14-45mm kit lens and it’s certainly a pretty good performer. They really don’t make cameras like this anymore!
It’s clear that Olympus threw everything at this camera and likely hoped it would attract the pro film crowd over to their Four-Thirds digital system. This makes me wonder what we’re really paying for these days when we spend thousands on a camera body and it’s not even built to the same specifications as this old E-1! Not that this camera was cheap at the time.
Built to the edge – Olympus E-1
Is the magic real?
In some ways, it doesn’t much matter if the Kodak sensor has some inherent superior colour properties or not. The E-1 is just a joy to use. That’s as long as you don’t mind limited dynamic range, and the need to protect highlights and do some editing. The camera does churn out some great looking photos and I look forward to trying it in many more scenarios. And lastly, no other shutter sounds this gentle!
Hong Kong offers a feast of sights for those with camera in hand. Spending all day carrying the Nikon D7100 and an attached 55-300mm DX lens – since sold and replaced by the old 70-300mm ED VR lens – is not exactly the lightest task. As with most Nikon cameras, the D7100 is solid and conveys a sense of trust and comfort. Whilst not the best telephoto lens available, the 55-300mm is certainly one of the least heavy in this class, even though the image is prone to softness, especially at the long end below f8.
The old walls have a face in Hong Kong – Nikon D7100 and 55-300mm lens
Before I purchased the D7100, I was using the Nikon D5100 – a truly capable camera with the well-reviewed sensor found in the Nikon D7000, though much cheaper. I really liked the D5100 but moving to the D7100 felt as though I was really moving on up in terms of features and ergonomics. Just the external buttons alone gave me easy access to ISO and White Balance – two dedicated buttons the D5100 didn’t have.
As much as I was tempted to sell the D7100 when buying into the Z system with the Nikon Z5, I just couldn’t bring myself to do it. I do miss the old Nikkor 50mm f1.8 D lens though, as it’s so light, small, and sharp. It’s a reliable camera and mine has a lot of life left in it.
The old walls have personality in Hong Kong – Nikon D7100
Years of grime, torn stickers, puckered adhesive, PVC pipes, and crazy wires that lead to subterranean places adorn the walls in many parts of Hong Kong. I love the texture of the place, the hustle and bustle, and the sea of humanity. But I’m not unaware of the poverty and the cramped lives, struggling to get through each day in the wet heat. And here I am, a tourist with a big camera, framing it all up and editing in a quiet room…
In the days between film and the mainstream take-up of digital, traditional companies like Nikon were doing what they could to persuade people to finally make the jump to Digital SLRs. We’re now a long way from the days of the Nikon D40 – featuring 6.1 megapixels and an APS-C sized sensor – but it can still surprise with excellent image making. And after going out with a number of Finepix cameras recently, the D40 feels fantastically Nikonian, which is to say that the ergonomics are comfortable and familiar.
Dodge and polished chrome – Nikon D40
Note the lovely reds of the car body and the blue of the chrome preserved in the above photo. Plenty of detail with this old sensor too. I was using the 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 Nikkor kit lens, version 1. Plastic feel for sure, but decent optics, especially for a 6.1 megapixel sensor, where any shortcomings of the glass aren’t a deal-breaker. It turns out that the shutter mechanism isn’t faulty at all, as I thought last week, just my inability to note that the Exposure Compensation goes in reverse on these Nikons! That’s some good news at least, and rather makes up for the Finepix 602z I recently purchased, with a bent CF pin and non-working EVF. At least it was cheap!
Garden of colour – Nikon D40
I was fortunate to have some great sunlight late in the day. These old CCD cameras definitely love the light, and I’m looking forward to also receiving my Olympus E1, even if it does have some usability issues. I’d heard a lot about the colour of the D40 and it doesn’t disappoint in this kind of light. I won’t say there’s something magical about CCD colour, like others do, but these photos do make you wonder whether image making has really advanced as much as we’re told?
As the leaves catch last light – Nikon D40
My Nikon D40 settings: JPG Fine, base ISO of 200, Exposure Compensation often set to -0.3 or -0.7, and Vivid picture mode. There’s barely any noise at 200 ISO and reputation has it that noise is not much of an issue up to 800 anyway. Old forums also suggest that the D40 has a tendency to overexpose, so I did often dial in a touch of negative Exposure Compensation just to preserve highlights.
The above photo was one that I made in Nikon’s native NEF Raw format. The Raw files from the D40 definitely have more latitude than the JPGs and it’s easier to tame highlights and shadows, but there’s certainly less editing potential in these files compared to the NEF files from modern Nikons. Nevertheless, the photo is pleasant, and working with NEF does provide the option to use a different White Balance setting and fine tune any sharpening.
The D40 was one of Nikon’s most popular early consumer cameras and I can understand why. I like that it’s so small and fits easily in a smallish camera bag. I’ll have to seek out the G version of the 50mm 1.8 lens for it, as the D version requires a screw drive motor, and the D40 lacks this feature. Really, the D40 proves that picture quality wasn’t a problem for digital cameras even in 2006.
In a previous post, I rushed out with the Fuji Finepix 6500fd and was impressed by the camera’s ability to hold onto detail. Fast-forward to a cloudy Sunday and a last-minute invitation from family friends, and once more, the Finepix 6500fd is in my hands. It has the feel of a mini-DSLR and the manual zoom, unlike most other Finepix cameras from the 2000s era, really adds to this feeling.
Pink scrawls – Finepix 6500fd
At this point, I’m trusting the Automatic White Balance of the 6500 because it does an admirable job, even on a really cloudy day. At some point, there’ll be some sun, I hope! As you can see in the above image, out of cameras JPGs are nice and colourful. Of course, I have it set to JPG Fine, ISO 100, and the Fujichrome picture setting so that there’s more saturation of certain colours and extra contrast. I’ve yet to use the F-Standard setting.
Roadside groceries – Finepix 6500fd
Like most older digital cameras, it’s not great when it comes to preserving strong light and shadow areas. There’s a bit of a focus on preserving highlight and shadow detail in modern photos, but it really depends on the subject and the type of photo it is. Is there anything you really want to preserve in the highlights/shadows? Do strong highlight and shadow areas add punch and drama to your photo? These are really the questions that should be asked, and not just an assumption that these areas need detail all the time. In many cases, clipped highlights and blocked out shadows don’t matter and add visual interest.
Bees and butterflies – Finepix 6500fd
I did also take out my Nikon D40 but I ended up bagging it because it seemed to be overexposing. As it happens, I think it was my error entirely. I’ll take it out again and check to see if it’s a mechanical issue with the shutter speeds or just me being completely stupid.
The cactus takes over – Finepix 6500fd
Because I set the Finepix to Soft sharpening levels, all of the JPGs benefit from some light extra sharpening in Lightroom. Using both Texture and Clarity in small amounts also brings the best out of this camera. I’d go so far as to say that the lens on the Finepix 6500fd is superb for the time, and it wrings the most out of the sensor to the point that a higher resolution sensor would likely be a better fit for the lens.
The Rusty Ruin Journal 