See original article here: http://bit.ly/8OPQ63

Joz Wang

When Joz Wang and her brother bought their mom a Nikon Coolpix S630 digital camera for Mother’s Day last year, they discovered what seemed to be a malfunction. Every time they took a portrait of each other smiling, a message flashed across the screen asking, “Did someone blink?” No one had. “I thought the camera was broken!” Wang, 33, recalls. But when her brother posed with his eyes open so wide that he looked “bug-eyed,” the messages stopped.

Continue reading »

Share this article with your friends!
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • laaik.it
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

Digital Cameras allow us to take a lot more photos than ever before. How do you share your digital photos with other people?

How do you share your photos with other people?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Share this article with your friends!
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • laaik.it
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

Last night over the year end company dinner, the topic of ‘grey’ import products came up for discussion which prompted me to raise a few points here for your comments or queries as this topic has regularly featured in South Africa’s photographic and I.T. industry for some time. Lets be honest, we all look at prices overseas and most often the difference in price really makes you think twice about the local deal we’re getting here at home.

Many people in South Africa don’t seem to understand why it is that buying a camera locally can cost more than buying abroad. As an example a Canon EOS 1D Mk III will cost R38, 900.00 according to the site of a local dealer in Johannesburg. The same camera will arrive in SA for just under R32, 000.00 from a large dealer in the USA. Another example, is the Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR a fantastic wildlife lens. It’s local price from an online retailer is R63, 700.00. The same lens from perhaps the largest photographic store in New York has two prices. The one carries the Nikon USA warranty (which as far as I know is meant to cover it internationally) the other lower price is for the same lens with a warranty supplied by the actual store. Even going on the higher price and over compensating the import duties, you can still expect this lens to land at around R50, 000.00 that’s a big saving.

Why are our products here in South Africa so much more than overseas? A few reasons can and have been given by local dealers, one of the main ones being volumes of sales. The market in Africa for photographic goods is a fraction of what it is in the US or other parts of the world and in some cases examples of have been given of one store in New York selling more stock of a particular brand than the local agents of that same brand do throughout our country. That certainly plays a role in negotiating better prices from a factory level.

The second biggest issue is the rate of exchange on our currency. Now before you shout that the Rand is at some of its strongest levels against the Dollar we have ever seen, you must realize that nearly all of the products distributed in South Africa are supplied through the European distribution networks, hence the Dollar’s weakness does not mean we have Rand strength, in fact there is little gain of the Rand against the Euro lately which is the currency with which our products are bought.

There are other issues that I must raise, perhaps the biggest of which is that many of the agents who import photographic equipment locally as the appointed agents are separate companies from the brand which they import and even those who have closer ties to their European brand distribution channels need to pay for the offices, staffing needs and service centers operating locally. To do this they must make their mark up on the products they sell to your friendly retailer who in turn adds a tiny 10% mark up at most in order to pay their sales team. It is then that you can see why local dealers don’t like you buying abroad.

Now the question to ask is whether the price difference makes sense? I personally don’t mind paying a little extra for the local product when I am getting fast, efficient service particularly on repairs, and I certainly don’t mind paying my local camera store for the help and knowledge they offer, but does this really justify a 20% or more price difference? I should think not. But if the retailers are only making 10% then where are all those extra costs coming from? Is there a local wholesaler who would like to volunteer a break down of their costs for us?

If you were to ask me is it worth it to buy ‘grey’ good then, what would be my reply? There are some risks that you must take into consideration.

1. Service. Many of the local agents refuse to service grey products under warranty. If you think that the loss of your sale locally meant that they lost money to pay the same staff who you now expect to service you gear you can see why, but there is more to this problem than that. Take the focusing/sub-mirror assembly problem on the Canon EOS 1D Mk III that is just being rectified now. Canon’s general policy on fixing such faults is to repair at no cost, however the new parts due to be replaced are sent out according to serial number, hence if you bought from the States your parts are now in the States and often – if you bought from a dodgy dealer – its up to you to get the camera there for repair.
2. Not everything is in the box. There have been people in the past who ordered their camera for a bargain price online who didn’t realize that not all dealers honestly sell the full box with charger, cables, software etc. Instead the camera arrives on its own and you quickly realize why at the bottom of your online order there was that section of “Other items bought by people buying this product” included what you thought was a ’spare’ charger, cable etc.
3. Compatibility. There are always issues that plugs or voltages are not the same as we have here at home and in some cases even instruction manuals are not in English upon the products arrival.
4. Serial Numbers. So you think you have made a good buy, everything is in the box and the camera has no known major defects, but the 6 months later there is a problem and you take it in for a service locally hoping that they won’t know any better. Many local agents don’t track serial numbers of products, but manufacturers in their wisdom have regionalized many serial numbers, for example all products beginning 1xx-xxx-xxx are USA and 3xx-xxx-xxx East Asia etc. Meaning that without an African/European region code the service centre will still refuse to service it, or at best take their time and charge you labour.

Despite all the points made above, I know some people who have had excellent service from retailers they bought from overseas who – when a problem was encountered – had a courier collect the camera, lens etc the next day and within the week it was returned repaired or replaced, but they made sure to buy from the really big retailers.

In the end it becomes a debate of ethics. One of the things that gets to me the most is people who will use an hour of a knowledgeable salesman’s time – who in many cases is providing for his family on his 1-2% commission – just so that they can suck the info out of him and try out the camera before they place their order online. I have even heard of cases where people come straight out and say that that is their plan and they can’t understand why the sales person will not assist them further or does so half heartedly and when something goes wrong or their camera arrives incomplete who do they call first? The poor guy who’s time they waisted at their local camera shop because they don’t want to spend thier savings from buying overseas on international calls.

If you want to buy grey, then have the guts to check it out online, get your facts from the place where you shop and take the leap of faith without touching or trying it out in a local store. But is there an answer to the price differences? Well that will be a topic we hope to bring you further response on in the New Year. One thing is for sure though, if we want to increase local volumes we need to start supporting the local agents and perhaps then we will see their confidence in the local buyers increase meaning a gradual decrease in their mark ups and in time volume discounts.

Share this article with your friends!
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • laaik.it
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

Thursday was the annual late night trading in Parkhurst – happening again next week, 29Nov’07 for those interested – and being in the area I decided to pop in to The Cow Artworks to see what was on. It was great to see some wonderful black and white prints on the walls and appreciate the talents of other photographers, more particularly that of local people who are doing so well here and abroad.

I had time to chat for just a few minutes to Athol Rheeder who is currently exhibiting his work from his book ‘Unto London’ there at the gallery. What fascinated me about our chat was his passion for film and the amazing printing of Silvertone International in Parktown. His voice echoed that of professional photographers from around the world in recent surveys conducted by Kodak this year. Perhaps I can share their findings with you briefly here.

The Europe Survey conducted around June/July’07 found that of the nearly 3000 photographers who participated

* 67% intended to continue using film
* 55% preferred the results of film over digital
* 19% admitted to choosing a film camera for more than 60% of their work
* 80% of photographers participating in the survey shoot black & white with 45% of those preferring film.

In the US survey conducted Aug/Sep’07 more than 9000 professional photographers responded, with the following being the results of that survey.

* 75% of participating photographers said they will continue to use film even while “embracing digital”
* 68% prefer the results of film to digital
* 48% felt film was superior in capturing information on medium and large formats
* 48% use film to create a “traditional photographic look”
* 45% prefer film for capturing shadow and highlight detail
* 42% prefer film’s wide exposure latitude
* 38% appreciated film’s archival storage
* 90% of the surveyed photographers shoot black & white with 47% saying the medium has a certain look or feel
* 57% of black & white photographers choose film to achieve the look and feel they find in black & white images

In both surveys some of the reasons given by the photographers for their preference of film over digital were

* Ability to capture detail
* the “traditional” look
* shadow detail
* Less time behind the PC and more behind the lens.

It is not surprising that Kodak has reaffirmed its dedication to the medium of film as it seeks to grow its share of both the traditional and digital markets.

I found this rather fascinating, and felt somewhat satisfied that I was not all alone on this side of the fence. Don’t get me wrong, I own a few digitals and contrary to what some have said about spending less time behind the lens because of editing images, I find that I am shooting more than I ever could afford on film, but that doesn’t mean I am sold 100%. My collection of ‘paper weight’ film bodies has grown far beyond what I had expected it would.

I have a few gripes with digital starting with the purchase of my first digital SLR with a second hand lens that was considered to be extremely sharp for the system I had bought into on film. I was shocked when I sat down to look at my images and found that they lacked the crispness I had attained some years before when I had previously used this lens. I have subsequently found many explanations for this, but it was a major blow to my confident decision to go digital. Suddenly I found that all the knowledge I had gained from previous experiments with some 100 or so lenses I had tested in the past did not hold true on digital. I had to start from scratch.

It took a few weeks to resolve the lens issue. Once this was done my enthusiasm gained momentum and there was hardly a day that I did not pick up my new camera. I quickly found the benefits of experimenting without fear of cost. This throwing of caution to the wind meant I was shooting some 500 images within the first few weeks and getting the odd exceptional image from my “never tried before” attempts to record things in a different way to what I did in the past. Digital photography was GREAT!

Then something began to happen – I am not a big user of photo editing software, mainly for two reasons. First I don’t get hugely excited by it. It’s not that I don’t believe in it, I just don’t get the butterflies in my stomach or the magical childlike feeling that I felt in the darkroom – though I know many who do feel such emotions as they eagerly open their images and adjust the levels, brightness, contrast etc. The second reason I don’t Photoshop much is the feeling I have of limited knowledge in the program, and though I want to learn more, the limited time restraints mean that the more time I’m behind the PC, the less time I’m behind the lens. Yet the more I shot, the more I find myself glaring into the screen of my PC, a cycle that seems to never stop.

Remember the days when a good image in a roll of 36 exposures was a moment where you almost felt a tear come to your eyes? Today one feels a tear because its usually one shot out of 50 or 100. I have very few images up on my walls at home – sad when you consider that with digital I am shooting more than ever before – and those few photographs are my pride and joy, but none of them are printed from digital, and this is my final gripe. I work with digital printing daily, and perhaps I am going blind (all the long night in front of my screen) but I find there is “punch” missing in the prints I do today. I recently read an article quoting a professional photographer as stating that in some small why, the emulsion of film and paper is 3 dimensional due to the nature of its make up, its density. Maybe digital appears flat simply because it is just that, flat capture. Whatever the reason, for me this is my greatest gripe, or at least par with detail and sharpness from scratch because in my world an image is not an image till it is printed and usually the bigger, the better I feel. It is in the print that the work is done and on digital I sit with more unprinted than I ever had on film.

In conclusion, will I ever leave film? I doubt I will completely, in fact right now my wife sighs each time she passes the enlarger I just enquired for our one room apartment that will soon have a part-time lavatory/darkroom.

Share this article with your friends!
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • laaik.it
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

Leica M8 or R9? This was the question raised in a camera store I visited earlier this week and the discussion that followed between the customer, store owner and myself prompted me to re-phrase the question and chat about the real issue or core of the debate, Rangefinder or Single Lens Reflex?

In the conversation at the shop, the customer who raised this question stated that his friend had mentioned that the M8 would be a better purchase than the R9 he had been considering particularly in regards to it’s ability to perform as a digital camera in comparison to the dual medium R9 – at least that is what the store owner and I understood from his statement concerning his friend and that led to me joining the discussion.

As some of you know, I am a fan of rangefinder cameras, and the debate for me should not be the ability of these two cameras to capture better digital images, but rather on the very different design factors involved and how they would affect the user. The issue is why should I choose a rangefinder over an SLR? What are the pros and cons? What is my preferred subject matter? Which system will help me more easily attain the level of expression I wish to achieve?

Here are my thoughts on the uses of these two different systems and where they have their place in the various styles of photography that I pursue.

Rangefinder

Among photographers Henri Cartier Bresson was probably the best known rangefinder user to date and in all his work he sought to capture what he defined as the “decisive moment”. Why was the rangefinder his chosen tool? In part it was due to the fact that Leica’s rangefinders pioneered the 35mm movement and were for some time the most refined 35mm cameras on the market, but in time SLR’s became available and yet his preference did not change. My personal view is that the quiet shutter and relatively compact size of the rangefinder made this style of camera the better choice for candid photography.

Another benefit in favour of rangefinders is the lack of a reflex mirror. This allows for a minimal delay between the depressing of the shutter button to the opening of the shutter to expose the image. Yes the delay may be minimal but when your goal is to catch the decisive moment every split second counts.

Some people have stated that a rangefinder focusing system is difficult to use. Though it takes time to get use to, the one advantage I have found is that the brightness of the viewfinder is never affected by the maximum aperture of your lens, a plus in low light when you don’t have fast lenses.

Certainly the only way one can truly learn and appreciate the benefits of working with a rangefinder is to use one with an open mind and you will soon see if it works for you. I think that any person wanting to shoot candid portraits, be compact in their travels or seek the sharpest wide angle lenses for their landscapes could do well to investigate a rangefinder. There is also the nostalgia of the classic feel and knowing that this is the system that many great photo journalists used to capture their stories.

From a technical aspect, it has always been easier to produce sharper optics for a camera that has no reflex mirror or obstructions between the rear element and the film. One challenge however was how to get an accurate light meter reading through the lens – something Leica began to correct with their M5 – and the issue of parallax error has always made some users skeptical about how close they could get without risking chopping off heads.

Single Lens Reflex

Yes, rangefinders are not perfect and so for many of us; there will always be place for the versatile SLR. One of the greatest strengths for this system is the fact that straight away you are seeing what the lens sees, and it is easier to include a light meter that would read through the lens. With the number of SLR manufactures and independent lens makers, owners of SLR cameras were quickly spoilt with choice and the added benefit of longer telephotos than had ever been dared for rangefinders, moving photo journalists further from harms way.

This did have its weakness though, as camera bags have become bigger and bigger as more lenses were bought and had to be accommodated on vacations or trips for fear of missing any shot. So the modern day zooms where born to reaffirm the SLR’s dominance as the most convenient system and though at first the optical quality was questionable many zooms today give rather impressive results.

Ultimately, if you want to shoot sports, wildlife, events or just generally get into photography, there is no other option and certainly no more versatility than that of the 35mm Single Lens Reflex, or the digital equivalent of today.

Conclusion

I hope that I have been able to highlight some of the issues at hand regarding the choice of SLR or Rangefinder. Ultimately the decision will come down to what you prefer and the type of photography you wish to create. One thing is for certain however, that in terms of Single Lens Reflex cameras the photographers of today have no lack of choice. It is just sad to see that there are not even half the number of manufactures for rangefinders as SLR’s, yet alone the fact that there are no truly affordable rangefinder systems available – certainly not here in South Africa.

Share this article with your friends!
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • laaik.it
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email
© 2010 PhotoComment Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha
Afrigator Copy Protected by Chetan's WP-CopyProtect.