2023 Weekly Challenge Week 43: Sigma SD15

The Sigma SD15 is perhaps the most unique interchangeable lens camera in my collection. A camera that while it has a number of shortcomings is not something I'd ever get rid of; and unlike the Canon 1D Mark IIn that I did pass onto a Friend, I don't find it ergonomically challenging or difficult to shoot.

Yes you heard right, the camera itself is a Sigma. It is the one time that Sigma Lenses could be called first party. Sigma once made DSLR, Mirrorless and Fixed Prime bridge cameras (the latter of the three with really funky ergonomic designs).  

Recently Sigma developed their first Full Frame sensor MICL camera but the reception to them so far has been luke-warm at best which is not too dissimilar from their foevon cameras. 

Sigma's new Full-Frame camera is also marketed as a Cinema video-camera vs a stills camera as well, so the photography-centric division of Sigma cameras died with the SD1 Merill and Quattro series cameras, and the end of the Sigma SA lens mount.

I own one of the older models, the third DSLR Sigma released the Sigma SD15.  So let's take a look at this unique camera and the reasons I bought it to add to my collection when I started really collecting digicams in 2018:

Released in 2010 this camera was a very minor upgrade to the SD14 using the same 1.7x APS-C (the smallest sensor to still be considered APS-C) Foevon 3 layer CMOS non-bayer pattern 4 megapixel sensor.  I covered one other multi-layered sensor earlier this year, the Fuji SuperCCD in the S2 Pro.

At 4 megapixels this is the lowest resolution Interchangeable lens camera sensor camera I own, and when shooting this camera much like an early digicam you want to avoid cropping if at all possible.  The sharpness of this sensor at full resolution does however mean that it can still take some pleasing shots for sharing at a social media output as long as you really don't crop the photos.

The Foevon sensor was Sigma's signature into the world of Digital photography; but they ended up just making a cult following rather then becoming popular and widely used.  This sensor trades both resolution and ISO capability for increased color and contrast even beyond what a CCD sensor could manage; but at a steep price which is why these never took off.  

In 2010 very few people wanted a 4mp DSLR with no video capabilities that couldn't make useable photos above ISO 400; yet Sigma released one to try and appeal to a very specific niche of photographers. 

Other then the color output this camera is not too far off in capabilities from some early DSLRs in the terms of ISO capability and resolution like the Canon D30 released 11 years earlier in 1999.

Just like the Fuji S2 Pro you can process the image as an interlaced "high resolution" image to expand the resolution from 4mp to 14mp, which is what most marketing for the camera list this camera as; a 14mp sensor rather then a 4mp one. 

Unlike Fuji however you needed to download Sigma's software to create this high resolution file.  You could not unstack it in the camera (though later SD and Quattro cameras offered this ability).  So at the end of the day its really stuck at only 4mp, which is suitable for un-cropped web posting but not much else.

This sensor is extremely tact sharp at full resolution and this was what these sensors were known for.  The later Quattros and the SD1 Merril had a more reasonable native resolution but still suffered from the terrible noise patterns at High ISO.

Released in the era where video was starting to become a major feature on DSLR cameras, the SD15 also took a step away from this as well.  It can't shoot video (nor does it have liveview).  It is perhaps the closest thing I have to a Film Camera in a Digital format in operation outside of the Fuji S2 Pro and at times it's actually kinda refreshing not to have all those extra features.  So the lack of features on the SD15 in this case actually adds to its charm for me.

With that said, the reason I bought this camera and the one feature that really makes this camera unique is that it has a user-replaceable IR pass filter.  You can pop this off and have a Full Spectrum Infrared camera without risking damaging the sensor. 

The first two years I owned the camera I shot it with the IR pass filter off as my IR modded full spectrum camera before I purchased my two modified IR bodies. With the IR filter removed and some POST corrections you would get images like this:

During the review week I shot it with the IR pass filter on so it shot as normal. I also had to shoot it in JPEG mode which gave me less to work with and forces me to make more adjustments to the image on the camera itself as the .x3f RAW format of this camera is not fully supported by Adobe.  

Adobe gives the ability to open and edit the RAW files; but strips out all the extra color information that makes the Foevon sensors unique and sets it to the absolute flattest profile it can.  So getting a RAW from this camera to look "good" requires a lot more work in POST then I wanted to deal with.

Overall this camera has a lot of unique properties and things I like about it.  Ergonomically it feels nice, and has nice tactile buttons and controls.  It does have a short 2 second or so startup delay from power-on/sleep which is a lot slower then other DSLRs on par with the original Canon Rebel, but it does not make it unusable unlike some other point and shoot cameras which have much longer startup times. While it has a slow FPS drive it has an adequate buffer to take several photos in quick succession without having to wait for it to write between shots.

Ergonomically this camera has a very solid feel to it, and the "kit" lens is fully weathersealed with an internal zoom and does not feel cheap as other kit lenses tend to do. The layout is different but not hard to get used to (unlike something like the 1D Mark IIn).

The SD15 also has one thing (or lack of) from any other DSLR I own:  It's basic.  There are no "Fireworks/Baby/Sports etc" modes that are useless to 99% of photographers on it.  You have PASM, the 4 modes you need on the Mode Select dial.  That's it. This is something I wish more camera manufacturers would do on anything enthusiast level or above.

Because of the poor low-light performance, low resolution and lack of support for the RAW files from Adobe the Sigma SD15 is not a camera I would have around as a daily shooter.  However like the Pentax Q10 it is unique enough that I would never get rid of it.

The weather this week was not ideal, so I had a lot less photo ops to take advantage of.  I only had one day of good weather (Sunday) which I mostly took photos of the last of the Fall Colors and some mushrooms I found in a public forest near my house.  The rest of the week was rainy, cold and very dark/overcast so I only got a few snapshots during the week otherwise.  So enjoy a few photos from what I did manage to get this week from this strange and unusual DSLR camera:

Opinion: Smartphones, AI Art and Photography- Is Resistance Futile?

In an earlier post I went on a partial rant about how I dislike two perceptions on Digital Photography, the first being the "High End" photography snob (which is nothing new- this has been around since the dawn of Photography) and the Smartphone push which is something new within the last decade.

Before I get too far into this, let me make one thing perfectly clear:  The following rant is of my own personal Opinions and observations.  A mantra as it were.  It doesn't mean that my mantra is 100 percent correct nor does it mean that someone who disagrees with this is wrong either.  

I know the world is changing, and I know that Smartphone photography is only going to grow and never go away.  So this post maybe like yelling into a category five hurricane for it to go away, but I feel its worth getting my thoughts out on something I as an individual am powerless to fight or change.  

More and more people will continue to use their phones to capture every moment of their lives in photos. But the question is, when will we pass that threshold of when the photo you take on your smartphone is no longer actually a photo but a procedurally generated AI image that the computing power of the phone and internet has created to please you?

I've been wracking my brain of why I dislike the whole "You don't need a camera if you have a Smartphone" or "My phone can take BETTER photos then a Dedicated Camera!" philosophy.  I've done some reflection on why this makes me feel backed into a corner as it were and a just Relic from another time.

I also did some reflecting on an extremely hot topic in the Traditional Art community and that is AI Art.  I have several friends who are Artists and I also have ties to other communities that are very centric around Traditional Art and all of them seem to be united against a common enemy like Starfleet was united against The Borg:  AI Art.

After this reflection I saw a lot of parallels to AI Art vs the Traditional Art community and what Smartphones have and are continuing to "evolve" digital photography into even if they are two distinct (yet related) issues. 

On that note, I have also observed how the overly defensive position of Artists vs AI art is but most Photographers will either be totally neutral about Smartphone Photography or will fully embrace it. And I ask myself why is that?

Both Smartphone Photography and AI Art share one thing in common:  they are the "Easy" button for getting an image of what you want both in the real world and in one of fantasy. 

In fact the line between AI Art and Smartphone photography is getting more blurred all the time as there are instances of major smartphone manufacturer's using AI to replace aspects of a photo to make the image far better then the small, limited sensor the smartphone camera could possibly take; most notably the Samsung Moon replacement AI debacle. (Source: https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/13/23637401/samsung-fake-moon-photos-ai-galaxy-s21-s23-ultra).

In the Dystopian future we are heading towards AI is poised to replace News reporters, commercial truck drivers, taxi and bus drivers, airline pilots as well as making both art and photography "obsolete".  

The Art community has taken a strong "line in the sand" take on AI art, yet the photography community, as a whole (with certain standouts like myself) is more then willing to embrace or ignore the issue at hand, with Smartphones being the entry into the AI Photography driven future.

It won't be long before phone sensors are used only as a frame of reference for an AI to search for a "better" version of the image and either fully replace from someone else's photo (Yuck) or generate it based on the frame reference the small limited sensor gave it.  

Digital zoom will no longer be crispy as the phone's AI will simply replace and regenerate its own image in the place of what the sensor actually took; and most people will be none the wiser or even care.  As mentioned in the link article above, it's already starting to happen.

So maybe this is one of the core reasons I am so against to using smartphones for photography.  I admit, I do use editing tools on my images after the fact to make changes and enhance said image to make it more accurate or pleasing to what my eye sees. 

But in this case I am still making all of these changes manually and not replacing my own work with something "better" that someone else took of the same subject, nor am I telling the computer to automatically create a photo for me based on a "lesser" reference shot that I took.

Another aspect of AI art and AI Photography or video is "Deep Fakes".  And that is generating or impersonating the likeness of a person through a procedurally generated image or "video" to make it appear as if it was a real photo or video with that person involved.  Like digital AI Art this technology is learning, adapting and getting better with every new deep fake generated.

With Smartphone photography the AI of the phone is doing all of these edits for you, which is a big part of the reason I suppose I have been suspicious or wary of the technology from the start. You press a button and the phone's "camera app" makes all the edits automagically for you to guess what might enhance the image to what would please a human eye.  

Often it guesses right and makes images that draw people to better smartphones so they can get the better AI enhanced image and so the phone can give them that better output they can share instantly online.

Sometimes however a Smartphone's "AI Editing" or automagic edit features can fail spectacularly.  Like the "bokeh blur" adding hard cookie cutter style outlines around the subject or blurring out part of the main subject such as a second person or part of a face.  

Same thing can happen with automagic HDR filters where stacked images can make a "crayon" look to a photo or with photo merged ultra-wide angle shots which can duplicate wheels in a car in motion, limbs on an animal or even duplicate or remove eyes on a human face.

Early AI art suffered from a lot of these same "tells" with AI processors that had difficulty with human anatomy and would draw disfigured people with seven fingers and knees that went backwards.  The other tell from early AI art was its inability to generate Text in a comprehensive language meaning any signs generated from AI would often look like they were from a Cantina in Star Wars with random letters and non-letter symbols meshed together to form text.

However, more advanced AI Art, Deep Fakes and AI processing in smartphones is making a lot of these tells become less noticeable or go away entirely.  We are on the precipice of being able to request a digitally rendered photo that is just "as good" or "better" to the average person then an authentic photo or piece of artwork drawn or taken with a camera.  

The line between what is real and what is fake is beginning to become very much a thinner and blurrier line as we advance into this dystopian nightmare of a future. 

Technological Dystopias are fueled by the majority of a population being content in believing what they are told by an AI, and this is the future we are headed towards with Artwork, Video and yes Photography. So to me, resisting this Dystopia reality is important even if the majority of the population will embrace it.

So to wrap this up, maybe a lot of my hostility towards considering "smartphones" as "valid" cameras stems from a lot of the same reasons Artists are becoming hostile to AI Art.  

I don't expect people to understand, maybe I am just this crazy Elder Millennial who is not hip to just pressing an "Easy Button" and letting an AI decide what I want.  Perhaps this is what it all boils down to in the end.

How content are digital photographers, as a whole to be replaced by an AI and used only as someone who "captures a reference shot" that the AI then replaces with something better?  Because that I feel is the Future we are headed towards...

And in my observations all of this started with the Smartphone.

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 42: Olympus Tough 8010

Olympus (who sold their camera division later to OM) became known for two distinctly different cameras.  Their Mirrorless interchangeable lens Micro 43rds system (of which I reviewed the Olympus PEN EPL-1 earlier this year) and their Tough series of shockproof and waterproof digital pocket cameras.

I own two of the lower-end Tough TG series cameras but sadly not a TG-X series as those cameras command a higher price then I want to pay for. I have no use-case for a dedicated higher end shockproof camera as I do not currently partake in any recreation that would require or benefit from a waterproof camera beyond something that is weathersealed from being splashed and not fully submerged.

That said, I do own two of the lower end Tough cameras, one which was off a clearance shelf at Walmart for $30 and another which was at a thrift store for under $20.  Today we are going to review the older and lowest-end (though more durable) thrift store find the Olympus Tough 8010

Released in 2010 the Olympus Tough 8010 is an all metal shockproof and waterproof camera with a 1/2.3" 14mp CCD sensor.  While it has a more durable casing and therefore more shockproof design then later models (such as the TG-620 that I also own and still have to review) it has a few very irritating design useage flaws which I will get into here shortly.

I'll do a TLDR review right now.  I hate this camera. I hate shooting it as this is the least responsive camera I own, and that is saying something. So yes even the GE RS 1400 camera while I want to chuck that camera for other reasons had a faster startup time, and is more responsive with less shutter lag then this thing has.

Because of this, all of my sample photos are of non-moving (mostly landscape and still life) objects.  This camera would be nearly impossible to take photos of anything in motion even something that was not moving fast; the few attempts I did for capturing motion I did try did not turn out at all so thus didn't make the cut for my pool of test shots.

The Olympus Tough 8010 has a painful 10 second startup time. Seven seconds or so of that is on an Olympus logo boot screen and the last 2-3 seconds is just looking at a black screen of nothing before the camera is ready to take a photo.  This is over twice as long as digi cams I own from around the turn of the millennium which is pretty awful considering this camera was released in 2010.

Startup delay is not the only flaw the camera has.  It has a painfully slow .5 to one full second shutter lag comparable to something like the Canon Powershot A410 from 2004.  This mid-range Shockproof camera is therefore less responsive to the lowest end Canon Powershot you could buy 6 years earlier.  Considering how much Digital Photography advanced between 2004 and 2010 this is even more shocking.

Additionally operating the menus has about the same sort of quarter second or so delay that one would experience on a very early digicam; making it very easy to scroll past something as one would press a navigational button twice due to not having an instant response I am used to.

Physically the buttons are squishy and non-responsive and this includes the shutter.  It is really hard to gauge the 2 stage shutter and you really need to squeeze it to take a photo. That said, squishy buttons and controls are not uncommon for fully waterproof cameras (the Olympus TG-620 has some of the same "feel" in that regards) but this camera takes the squishy button to the extreme.

All of this aside, there are however a few redeeming qualities to this camera, so while it may be my most frustrating to shoot camera I own it is not the worst overall digi-cam I own.

First off is the build quality.  While I quibble about the sponginess of the buttons otherwise the build quality is extremely solid. It is a brick of metal that could likely be weaponized if you swung it around on the wrist strap like a morning star.  It was built to be shockproof and on that- it delivers.    

The Tough 8010 has fairly solid battery life (I got roughly 200 photos on one charged battery) and more importantly has USB charging which for 2010 was extremely rare.

It has a sliding solid metal lens cover to protect it from being scratched when the camera is off, though this could be a liability if sand was to get in the mechanism or if it got dented.

I'm partial to the color blue, so from the outside the nice reflective metallic blue on the front of this camera makes it pop from an aesthetic design standpoint.

The next thing that gets it a few more points is that it is a waterproof camera which gives it a utility that other cheaper cameras do not have.  You could take it whitewater rafting or scuba-diving and return with a bunch of really blurry photos because of how terrible it is for action photography.  But the camera would survive and have these images rather then being waterlogged and shorted out.

One more thing I can give it some points for is a Panoramic stich feature.  It's of course not perfect but it is something you don't see in very many digicams. Its more of a novelty however then being reliable enough for anything serious as after playing with it this was the best result I was able to get from the camera (you can see that it messed up on the orientation of the last shot but did a decent job with the first stitch):

Lastly the image quality for still not-moving objects (IE Landscape or Still Life) is acceptable. It has the nice bright and vibrant CCD colors one would expect (unlike some others like the Kodak Easyshare and Fuji A345 I reviewed earlier) and the Auto WB is surprisingly accurate in just about any shooting condition whether outside in bright sunlight, overcast/shadow or in indoor lighting.  

Below ISO 200 photos are actually pretty sharp and detailed though it sometimes struggles to focus at objects at infinity. Pictures I took at a few feet away were surprisingly sharp for how otherwise terrible this camera was to shoot. 

The camera does apply some pretty aggressive noise reduction at ISO higher then 400 (as you can see from the last example photo below) making it like many digi-cams with CCD sensors or CMOS sensors smaller then 1" not the best choice for indoor photography.  

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 41: Nikon D7200

In 2023 when you associate a higher end Interchangeable Lens camera, minus a few rare exceptions you are going to be thinking of a MILC not a DSLR.  The lesser known fact is mirrorless cameras aren't anything new.  They've been around since the mid 2000's as far back as 2004 with the Epson RD-1.  

It wasn't until Micro 43rds came out in 2008 with the Panasonic Lumix G1 soon followed by the Olympus EP1 that mirrorless would start to gain popularity. But for the next decade up until around/after 2018 whether you shot a DSLR or a Mirrorless camera was very much a "choice" and camera MFG would often show you the pros and cons of either format.

This started to change when Sony abandoned their A mount Hybrid SLT system in 2014 (which was still a Mirrorless camera in all respects but people treated it as a DSLR) and went full into pushing their E-Mount Mirrorless system as the only option for ICL from Sony going forward. 

It was the beginning of the end for DSLR cameras even though it would take Canon and Nikon another 5 years to make this leap and start to mothball their DSLR mounts; but any DSLR released after Sony fully committed to E-Mount in 2014 I would classify as a Swansong camera.  

Past this point most DSLRs would stop getting "better" or more innovative in order not to compete with the newer Mirrorless cameras. In the 2020s DSLRs would become a very small niche, with only Pentax doubling down on continuing to develop the format (for now).

While you can still buy brand new DSLRs from Nikon and Canon a lot of these are cameras that were developed before 2018 and are still kept in production until they run out of parts or until stockpiled warehouse supplies run out.

The Nikon D7200 came from the beginning of the last generation of DSLRs that pushed the envelope of what these cameras could do, and also included cameras like the big sister Nikon D500, D750, Canon 80 and 90D and Canon 5D Mark IV.  

Many cameras of the last of the DSLRs released after the D7200/D750 and 5D Mark IV era around were made to be worse then the previous generation; such as the Nikon D7500, Nikon D3500 and Canon Rebel T100. These cameras were produced to soak up surplus sensors and appeal to more budget-friendly audiences; signaling the end of the DSLR era. 

In many cases "upgrading" to this last generation of DSLRs IE going from a D7200 to a D7500 would actually be a downgrade. The D7500 takes out more premium features such as a second card slot and weathersealing along with using a sensor that isn't very different then what the D7200 uses.  

As such, the D7200 is my swansong DSLR- a great end to a format that is going to be no more then a footnote for camera collectors such as myself in another 5-10 years.

Released in 2015, three to four years prior to the 2018/2019 Nikon/Canon DSLR drop dead year the Nikon D7200 is a Professional APS-C crop DSLR featuring a 24mp CMOS sensor. While it wouldn't be the last DX crop DSLR from Nikon, it shall be the newest DSLR that I own as anything newer really doesn't give me all that much in terms or performance or image quality that the D7200 doesn't provide.

I bought my first D7200 used in 2019 after my Canon 80D had an early "death" due to weathersealing failure in the battery compartment (while I got the 80D to work again- I didn't trust it after it had shorted with water getting in the battery compartment so I sold it and moved to Nikon).

This was a camera that I was planning on setting me up for the next 5-6 years as my primary workhorse camera for event photography.  But that workhorse slot only lasted one year as the unpredictable happened: the world went into Lockdown due to the COVID Pandemic.

Facing a tight budget and not being sure of when or even if events would be allowed to come back, I was forced to sell my first Nikon D7200 in the summer of 2020 in the middle of the Pandemic to pay mortage for a month I was unemployed.  

I would get to re-buy another one two and a half years later in early 2023 for $200 less then what I sold my original D7200 for; but by that time I already owned a Z50 and would later double down on upgrading my M43 camera to the very capable Panasonic G9 a few months later.

At time of writing this I own two mirrorless cameras above the D7200 in terms of being more modern, reliable and having faster AF and more features; leaving the D7200 as the best mirror-flipper I own but no longer the best or tied for the best camera I own.

I'm happy that I did re-buy this camera in 2023 vs letting it go and fully moving on with the Z50 (as I could have) even if the "future of Photography" at this point is all Mirrorless.  

There's also a lot this camera can do that I am still only beginning to discover, and having a native mount camera to mount the lenses in my budget that I can afford (Used Nikon F mount) still has some advantages over adapting them to the Z50. 

I have a ton of native mount glass for this camera including some like the Tamron 60mm macro lens which does not play well at all on a mount adapter.  The larger body also balances better with bigger lenses such as the Nikon 80-400 that I shot many of the photos for this review with.

The biggest downside to this camera or its Achilles Heel, which I touched with on my D7000 review; is that the Liveview AF accuracy and speed is not the best even when compared to other DSLRs of its age such as the 5D Mark IV or Canon 80D.  

This camera is built to appeal to the DSLR traditionalist who lives shooting with the Optical Viewfinder, Liveview shooting being more of an afterthought then a focus on this camera.

In addition the D7200 does not have the burst speed of the Z50 or G9 and lacks the better AF tracking including Animal tracking present on newer Mirrorless cameras.  It also does not have the UHS II support of the G9 as well (but neither does the Z50).

While this swansong DSLR is no longer my best camera, and may fall into more of a backup or secondary camera role it is still an extremely solid camera I plan to shoot regularly for many years to come in large part for not having a true upgrade path to this camera in mirrorless format due to Nikon dragging their heels on making a Pro/Prosumer APS-C Z mount camera.

So enjoy a few photos I took this week with the camera that really sold me on Nikon APS-C cameras; the Nikon D7200 a final ode to the DSLR:

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 40: Nikon Z50

A year ago I was working through a difficult time in my life so I stress bought (but not without other long-term reasons behind it) the most modern camera in my collection the Nikon Z50 in Nov of 2022.

Like most of the cameras I rely on the Z50 has a Crop and NOT Full Frame sensor, which I know is backwards from how most photographers view their "high end gear" when it comes to photography. This is, however a different discussion for a different time. 

Trading in my Canon M3 towards the Z50 was also the final stone in my exit out of Canon as a primary system.  Prior to that I was shooting a mix of Nikon F DSLRs and the Canon M3 as my primary camera.  Since I no longer have the M3, I can't use it as part of my review but this camera was the direct upgrade for the Canon M3 and it was a significant upgrade at that.

And with that said let's move onto the review of my current main "sidearm" mirrorless camera, the Nikon Z50:

Released in 2019 the Nikon Z50 was the first APS-C (DX) mirrorless camera on Nikon's Z mount system. It is a mid-range Prosumer camera marketed as a mirrorless D7500; and just like the D7500 Nikon cut some unecessary corners in functionality when releasing this camera but still left in a number of features above what a true entry level Mirrorless camera would offer including dual control wheels, 1/3 stop ISO, Built in Interval Timer, and the ability to set a minimum shutter speed for Auto ISO in P and A modes.

The Nikon Z50 uses the same older 20mp CMOS APS-C sensor used in the D7500 and D500 but uses the Image Processor of the Z6 Mark II. This has the effect of making the Z50 a low light King for APS-C sensors even with running a 3 year old sensor from 2016. 

The Z50 can go toe to toe and even slightly nudge out modern entry level Full Frame cameras (Such as the Z5, Canon RP or Canon R8) for ISO performance and produce useable images in excess of ISO 12800; a feat otherwise unheard of for crop sensors outside of Fuji and the Sony A6700. This is without a doubt this camera's one really redeeming feature and main reason I bought it.

This camera falls into a strange niche as Nikon and other major Camera MFG's marketing teams constantly bombard to push anyone "Serious about photography" into Full Frame Mirrorless instead.  

It is the Ford Ranger of cameras; falling in the realm of marketing that Car Dealerships will often do; throwing everything they can to convince customers that they need the Ford F150 that's on the Showroom floor instead of a functional truck that has everything they need at a more affordable price on the back lot.

Overall the Z50 is a capable little camera that has everything you "need" and just lacks some things you may "want". Even with the stripped features Nikon took out to make something like a Z6 look more "appealing" it is still a lot of camera for the $500 USD I paid for mine used; certainly being more for your money then say an aging Nikon D3500 or Canon Rebel Series would be (as much as I love the simplicity of those cameras). 

Yes, there are times where the Z50 feels like an in-between camera for me until Nikon takes APS-C shooters seriously and not as an after-thought and releases a more "Pro" APS-C body without a lot of features stripped on it such bringing back Dual Card Slots, IBIS, Built-in Sensor cleaning, etc.  

But for the results this camera can pull for what I paid for it (noting how much an R7 would cost if I were still a Canon shooter) it is still worth the asking price especially if you can get one cheap used due to a waning demand for this camera.

The lack of an "R7 Competitor" by Nikon is one of the reasons that the D500 is one of the very few DSLRs (Crop OR Full Frame) that still sells used for over a grand used in most markets and quickly sells at this price when one becomes available. 

Nikon has yet to acknowledge this trend, and therefore people wanting a high quality DX body will have to make a choice between a D7500/D500 or the Z50 and living with the corners Nikon cut with this camera.

Currently, the two Alternatives to the Z50 (The Z30 and ZFc) offer no advantages over the Z50 and in the Z30 case actually even strip the features down further.  The ZFc is more or less a re-skinned Z50 with a slightly bigger body, shallower more "retro feel" grip and more analog buttons.  By Nikon not adding IBIS or a second card slot makes the added price of a ZFc over a Z50 not really worth it and keeps it in the same "Crippled Prosumer APS-C" niche.

That said, for what it is the Z50 is still very much an overlooked Diamond in the Rough in spite of a lot of "nice to have" features stripped out that one is used to having on a more premium mirrorless camera.  

Its image quality is fantastic, edging out my other "main" cameras the G9 and Nikon D7200 slightly especially in low-light situations.  

Since the Z50 lacks a number features over the G9, and is overall a little less responsive; these two cameras end up complimenting each other well for my "serious photography" needs.  

The Z50 makes a great companion for high-quality street and event photography especially with less then ideal lighting situations (Indoors, at night) where the G9 out performs it for focus speed, accuracy, tracking and burst shooting for Wildlife Photography but is not as good in low-light situations and has a more limited pool of lenses.

The Nikon Z50 works a lot better if you approach its Autofocus much like you would with a DSLR- adjusting the focus zones/points as you need and telling the camera where to focus vs just letting it do its own thing.

Ergonomically the camera fits in my hand very well, which is another huge upgrade over the Canon M3. It has a very deep recessed grip a lot like the G9 but in a smaller package. This makes handling most adapted lenses very comfortable to shoot although some of the larger lenses (such as the Nikon 80-400) are still a bit awkward to use with this camera.

Paired with the 24mm f1.7 prime lens (as pictured) it makes for a very ergonomic and lightweight side-arm camera that can be put on a secondary sling without encumbering or interfering with a secondary camera with a longer lens attached. 

Although it is still a lot larger then the Canon M3 and 22mm pancake lens was (that niche is currently filled with the Panasonic ZS100 if I need something truly pocketable) I was still able to fit the Z50 in a jacket pocket with the 24mm lens on (albeit barely) so it fits that mid-size "side arm" niche quite well.

Autofocus speed through the F to Z adapter with First Party Nikon lenses is among the fastest for any Z series camera, which is a common complaint about the system (especially for the OG Z6 and Z5). This includes even Nikon F "Kit" lenses such as the 18-105 which really surprised me at how solid the AF performed through the adapter.

The other side of the coin is that Third Party F mount lenses adapted with the Z50 even on the newer FTZ II adapter are very hit or miss on Autofocus; either not working at all (in the case with my Tamron 60mm Macro lens) or working but having some hunting/ AF accuracy issues as with my former Tamron 18-400 lens. The hit is quite noticeable with even cheap Nikon Kit lenses outperforming mid-range third party adapted lenses.

Due to the rise in popularity with Z mount, you can find a lot of first party Nikkor F mount glass for really cheap on the used market right now (both Nikon DX and FX F mount lenses will work great on this camera) so the restriction on third party F mount lenses not cooperating with the Z50 is a lot less of an issue, from a budget perspective. 

On a budget, a used Z50 plus adapter and a few F mount adapted Nikkor lenses slaps for a modern high-image quality enthusiast camera kit that won't break the bank. 

Just like the Panasonic G9 that I reviewed earlier this year; bang for buck this camera is another fantastic option, despite a few crippled features. For the price the Z50 still really knocks it out of the park for a high quality modern interchangeable lens camera you can easily assemble a kit for less then $1000 USD used; lenses and adapter included.

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 39: Kodak Easyshare C330

For this week's review I decided it was time to dust off another vintage Digicam from my collection instead of one of my remaining Interchangeable Lens cameras I have left to review this year.  In this case, the Kodak Easyshare C330.

Kodak was one of the first companies to produce not only the early Digital consumer cameras but the early "Professional" digital cameras which started as massive attachments containing Hard Drives and PCMCIA card bays for data storage that were digital backs that mounted to film camera bodies.  These are so prohibitively rare and expensive as well as a pain to get photos off of that I would never consider trying to get one of the early digital back Kodak cameras for my collection.

However in 2003 Kodak shifted its focus from the professional market to the low-end consumer market; the failed DCS 14n being the swansong of their professional digital camera division (and Kodak's one and only Full Frame DSLR). 

Kodak leaving the professional digital photography arena would pave way for brands such as Canon and Nikon; which ironically Kodak made the early Digital Image sensors and digital backs for.  

The camera I own that I am reviewing of Kodak's became what Kodak Digital was known for; an inexpensive no frills "shovelware" point and shoot alternative alongside other budget brands such as Vivitar, Coleman and Insignia.

Released in 2005, the Kodak Easyshare C330 was a budget digicam of which Kodak became notorious for after they left the more professional realm of Digital Photography in the early 2000s.

The Kodak Easyshare series was marketed towards consumers who wanted an affordable digital pocket camera that could be dropped into a dock of a specific portable photo printer and have digital photo prints at home in an instant.  In this respect, the Easyshare cameras were ahead of their time.  

Sadly I do not own the printer that goes with this camera, if I did I might give this camera slightly higher (or lower depending) marks then what I did for this review.  But all I can review is the camera itself, not the print system that Kodak developed to go along with this camera.

The Kodak Easyshare C330 has a fairly standard sensor for a compact camera of the time: a 1/2.5" 4mp CCD sensor.  That said, this sensor was not the smallest on the market as cameras like the Canon Powershot A410, which had a tiny 1/3.2" sensor and was a direct competitor to this camera by Canon. (A camera I reviewed earlier this year).

It runs on 2 AA batteries which are fairly easy to replace but the battery life is poor to mediocre.  I did have to swap batteries on this camera once and I shot less then 100 photos with it total. (Though I only had to change them for the last 10 photos, so I would expect you could get up to 100 shots on a full set of AA batteries- mine had a little drain on them prior)

Just like the Canon Powershot A410 and A510 the Kodak Easyshare is incredibly picky on SD cards.  Not only for not taking SDHC cards but even 1 or 2 GB SD cards will not read on this camera. Luckily I have a 128mb card that will read on all 3 of these cameras.

With the technical specifications out of the way, the million dollar question: Is the Easyshare C330 the worst digicam I've shot this year so far?  And the answer to that is no. It overall did a better job then the Canon Powershot A410, Fujifilm A345 and the GE RS1000. 

That said, this camera would likely be in the bottom five of digi-cams I have shot this year from both a usability and quality/output standpoint.  It has a slow write speed, no RAW support, very limited and basic shooting menu, and just overall is not unique or "fun" to hold and shoot as a lot of other digicams are in spite of their shortcomings. 

The shooting experience was a slight improvement over the Fujifilm A345; a camera that I struggled with back in my early days of Digital Photography to no end, mainly because it had a 4 way D-Pad that the A345 lacks.

The buttons are flimsy and the build lightweight and plastic, but it does have about the same build quality as the Fujifim and A410, which puts it above the GE.

The rear screen is very dim and low contrast which makes it really difficult to "eyeball" if something is under or over exposed. It is also difficult to shoot in bright light as a result, so you either need to just trust the light meter and shoot or use the tiny OVF.

The C330 did however do a good job of finding the right exposure in direct sunlight, something some early or cheaper Digicams like the Powershot A410 struggle with. 

For a CCD sensor it really struggles to pull in warm colors on an overcast day; but it does much better in direct sunlight to pull more vibrant colors as long as the actual light is warm.  

This seems to hint that the C330 suffers from a lack of White balance adjustment (manually or automatically) to make images warmer in "cooler" lighting, unlike cameras such as the Fujifilm A345 and GE RS1000 which are very cold for a CCD sensor no matter what light they are shot in.

My overall verdict is if you are only shooting this camera in direct sunlight the Kodak Easyshare C330 is passable to get that vintage Digicam look. But I honestly wouldn't recommend it unless this camera is your cheapest or only option.  

All and all the Kodak Easyshare C330 was pretty mediocre and not a camera I would shoot as a daily shooter on a regular basis. There are a good number of other Digicam's I would recommend over this one for those wanting to get into Digicam photography.

It will likely go on my chopping block when I thin my collection as it is not unique itself (which I can consider the GE to be in spite of how terrible that camera is) nor does it have a story behind how I acquired it that will make me hold onto it as in the case with the Powershot A410.  But I managed to get a few passable images out of it this week, which I will share below: