Minolta X-370

(1998-2005)

My camera journey started with occasional admiration for my father’s Rollei. Sometime in high school I found a used Minolta X-370 with a couple lenses. I used this a little in college, mostly during backpacking trips and a photography 101 class.

With this camera my main concern was getting exposure correct. It was a manual focus lens. Using a light meter and balancing shutter speed with aperture was tricky enough. And there was no immediate feedback about whether you had exposed correctly or not. At the time I was exclusively interested in photographing landscapes with large dramatic mountains and no people (like Ansel Adams). This was fairly difficult to find living in the mid atlantic, so I didn’t shoot very much.

Powershot Pro 1

(2005-2013)

My first digital camera was a graduation present — a Canon Powershot Pro1. It had a built-in L-series super zoom lens (28-200 full frame equivalent) and a 2/3” CCD sensor. At the time, I wished it was a DSLR. I felt some inadequacy about not having one. But the fixed lens was really good and covered a wide range (28mm - 200mm full frame equivalent with f/2.4-3.5). It was a prosumer fixed lens with what canon called L-series glass. No stabilization of any sort, and bad noise at even moderate ISOs. Also battery life wasn’t great. But it was good enough that it was hard to justify getting a real DSLR. I was stuck between a sense of camera inadequacy and the idea of making do with a good-enough camera. I know that good pictures are more about the photographer’s skills than the camera. And I got some good pictures with that camera. But there were a lot of tossers too. The keeper rate wasn’t great. But it served me well, and in hindsight was a pretty great first adventure camera.

Sunset in the Wind River range, taken with Canon Powershot Pro1 @ ISO 50, f/2.8, 1/60 sec, 40mm equiv.

Storm over Jenny Lake from Teewinot Treeline Camp, Canon Powershot Pro1 @ ISO 100, f/2.8, 28mm equiv.

With the Powershot Pro1, I was mostly fighting with noise and camera shake. But my biggest challenge was composition. Also, with a small sensor and a maximum aperature of f/2.4, I wasn’t much bokeh. The electronic zoom was slow and a little frustrating. I got some great pictures though!

At the time, my mindset for how to get good pictures on this camera was:

Always shoot at the lowest ISO
Always carry more spare batteries
Low light requires a tripod (but I rarely had one)

Digital Rebel XT

(2011-2022)

I was eventually gifted a hand me down Canon Digital Rebel XTI by my sister in law. My first DSLR! It had an 8 megapixel APS-C sensor and came with a kit lens (18-55). Even though I could swap lenses, for whatever reason I don’t recall I just kept using that kit lens. In hindsight I should have picked up a cheap nifty-fifty. I guess since I got it for free, I just ran with it without doing much further research. I took it to Switzerland and made some great photos. I struggled with dust on the lens or sensor during that trip. Most of my pictures required some careful retouching to remove dust spots. But I got some great shots, a few of which are printed at 16x20 and hanging in my home. This camera satisfied me for many years. My interest in photography waned a little. I wasn’t traveling to beautiful mountains often, and I had a smart phone for day-to-day photography.

The Matterhorn from Zermatt, Digital Rebel XTI @ ISO 100, 55mm, f/11, 1/250 sec

Swirling Clouds under the Klien and Gross Feischerhorn from the deck of Berghaus Baregg.
Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTI @ ISO 100, 39mm, f/14, 1/100 sec

Eiger, Monch, and Jungfrau peek through clouds, Digital Rebel XTI @ ISO 100, 55mm, f/16, 1/125 sec

I only used the camera when I went on trips to the mountains. I envisioned myself in the vein of Ansel Adams or Galen Rowell. I wanted to photograph stunning landscapes, but wasn’t interested in much else.

Canon EOS 80D

(2022)

Spurred by an upcoming hut ski trip to Maine, I decided to upgrade from the Digital Rebel XTI to a bigger, better DSLR. After a good deal of research I chose the Canon 80D. I waffled between a full frame DSLR (the 5D mk 4), but ultimately went with the 80D because it was significantly cheaper and I could get cheaper lenses. I paired it with a used 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens and a fast 50mm f/1.8. In hindsight mirrorless options were plentiful and mature by 2022, but I think I had written them off as having worse battery life and not being real workhorse professional cameras like a true DSLR. I had coveted a good DSLR for almost 20 years, so finally acquiring a good one was the fullfillment of a long delayed dream.

I enjoyed that camera for a while. I took it on a ski trip to the Maine huts and a few day adventures cross country skiing, hiking, and climbing. But within a year two things prompted me to considering alternatives. One was the size. I distinctly recall a climbing trip where I ALMOST left it behind, because I just couldn’t find a place to cram it into a pack already full of climbing gear. I did bring it, and I got a few good shots, but most of them weren’t properly sharp due to poor focus management or camera shake. Which leads to the second and main issue — auto-focus. It came to a head when I attempted to DIY a family portrait session with my fancy new camera. It quickly degenerated into the kids chasing me around while I frantically tried to frame and focus a shot. I ended up with very few .. maybe zero pictures perfectly in focus. In hindsight, DIY family portrait sessions require both advanced parenting and very advanced photography skills. As I learned more about focus modes, I realized this is one of the great strengths of mirrorless cameras.

Flagstaff Hut at dusk with Canon EOS 80D @ 35mm, f/5.0, 15 sec, ISO 200, 15 sec

View from Windy Point with Canon EOS 80D @ 18mm, f/4.0, 1 second, ISO 400

Basically the 80D was too big to easily bring along, and the autofocus and tracking weren’t ideal for photographing fast-moving kids. This led me to dive into more camera research, reading about auto-focus systems and mirrorless cameras. After a lot of reading, I eventually landed on the last and best camera on Canon’s M-mount line. It targeted a remarkably similar niche to the PowerShot Pro 1.

Canon EOS M6 Mark 2

(2022-2024)

I researched mirrorless cameras, which were said to improve focus tracking. After a lot of research and some shopping around, I settled on the EOS M6 Mark 2. It was that or a Sony A6400. But I decided to stick with Canon mostly based on price. I found a great deal on a refurbished body from Canon. I was aware that Canon had discontinued the EF-M mount in favor of the newer RF mount. I thought the available lenses would covery my needs. And the discontinued EF-M lenses would be cheaper than the equivalent Sony lenses. I liked the size and weight. I liked the dials and controls. The autofocus was way better than my 80D. The camera was small enough to bring along on more outings.

This was a great little camera. I got a bunch of lenses for it. I owned almost all the “good” EF-M lenses. (It’s a very small lens ecosystem). I used it with the 18-150mm lens and the 22mm lens mostly. I loved how small it was. I only missed having an EVF occasionally when shooting moving subjects with a zoom. I loved the size. I loved the dials. The grip was comfy and nice.

It was researching the limited choices of lenses for the EF-M series that led me to first really learn the concept of lens quality. I knew about max aperture and focal length, but I previously had no concept for sharpness or abberations. I had no idea that stopping down a little can improve lens performance. There weren’t many options for EF-M lenses either, so it made the choices easier.

Grand Teton from Swabach’s Landing. Shot with Canon EOS M6 Mark 2 with Sigma 16mm, f/11, 13 seconds, ISO 125

Cherry Blossom at Tidal Basin on Canon EOS M6 Mark 2 at 32mm, f/3.5, 1/250 sec, ISO 400

I stared to notice a lot of soft pictures. And as I learned more about lens quality, I looked for sharp lenses for the system and found not much. I shot a lot with the 18-150mm super zoom. It has optical stabilization. It’s not known for being the sharpest zoom. And the combo of comparatively light stabilization and a soft lens left me unsatisfied. It didn’t help that I had 30 megapixels on an APS-C sensor, capturing in detail every imperfection of the lens. I almost purchased the 11-22mm, which is highly praised. But while deciding whether to pull the trigger on that purchase, I stumbled on micro-four thirds.

I’d seen it mentioned, but never positively. Then I found this fstoppers blog post, which resonated completely with my ideals in a camera — small, sharp, affordable, rugged cameras. I’d heard the term “micro four-thirds” before, but never understood what it meant.

Olympus & Micro-Four Thirds

Olympus mirrorless cameras are a hidden gem! Their cameras, and the micro four thirds system of lenses in general, are my idea of the perfect choice of tradeoffs with photography gear. I love that it counters prevailing wisdom by going with a smaller sensor size, and then maximizes all the benefits you can get from that (smaller, really good stabilization, nicer aspect ratio that captures more of the circle of light from lenses, smaller lenses, cheaper, etc.)

Micro-four thirds is a lens standard created for the smaller camera brands to build compatible lenses. It’s based on an open lens standard. It’s like the Linux of the camera world. It has a robust series of really good, even pro quality lenses that target a smaller sensor. This contrasts nicely with Canon’s EF-M line. While they target similar niches, Olympus did it better with higher quality glass and way better build quality.

Olympus cameras are beautiful and solid. Many are weather sealed with actual IP ratings. They have great in-body stabilization. Many pro features are included on mid-tier models, but they’re relatively inexpensive. The only thing you sacrifice is sensor size (and accompanying dynamic range and noise performance at higher ISOs). But the sensor is still relatively large. Not that much smaller than APS-C. And you get so many advantages that the disadvantages of sensor size are well compensated (in my opinion, for my use cases).

Everything I liked about EF-M (size, affordability) I can get with older and cheaper Olympus cameras (like the E-M5 mark ii). Plus I get a solid metal body, more buttons and dials, stabilization, amazing lens options, computational features, etc. But I halve my megapixels. Still, totally worth it for me. Keeper count goes way up.

One thing I really like about the good IBIS is I can have motion blur without blurring the whole picture from camera shake. I like that with kids — highlighting their dynamic nature by showing limbs in movement while face is sharp and in focus.

The main downside here is with a larger lens ecosystem, there is a never ending supply of new lenses to research and covet. With EF-M, there were very limited options. I almost had a complete collection of EF-M lenses. With micro four-thirds, you can spend a fortune building a large collection of cheap sub-$400 lenses that are all beloved classics.

Olympus E-M1 Mark 3

I really wanted to like the OM-5. On paper it’s great. But it had two flaws that ended up being deal killers for me. The main one is the reported issues using it with a peak designs capture clip. I really like that method of carrying a camera. There are more than one report of base plat failure due to this. Perhaps it’s overblown, but it made me shy away. Instead I opted for a cheaper refurbished E-M1 Mark 3, which is basically the same internals as the OM-5 but with a larger body and more pro featuers (two SD slots, joystick for focus point selection).

It’s a great camera. But it wasn’t quite as small and sleek as my M6 Mark 2. The OM-5 is almost an exact match in dimensions. I missed that slightly smaller and sleeker profile. And some of the tiny lenses like the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 looked oddly small on the E-M1 Mark 3 body. I wanted a body I could bring along on dates or weddings or family trips and feel a little sleeker and cooler.

Olympus E-M5 Mark 2

So I ended up getting a used E-M5 Mark 2, which is the last body of that smaller size made with the more solid metal body. It’s a neat little classic camera. It looks remarkably similar to my old Minolta.

I’ve got a growing collection of lenses for them. I started with the Lumix 14-140 (general purpose zoom), the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 (for family portraits), and a Lumix/Lecia 9mm f/1.7 (for interiors and milky way). I discovered that I received a non-weather sealed 14-140 from mpb (it’s pretty tricky to tell the difference between version 1 and 2 of that lens!). They swapped it for an Olympus 14-150mm v2 (which is weather sealed). I read a lot of disparaging things about the Olympus 14-150. But I’ve found it to be plenty sharp. Later I picked up a 12-45 f/4 PRO, and the 14-150mm f/4-5.6 v2 holds up really well. I can barely tell the difference pixel peeping, even wide open.

A few final closing thoughts. You can get great pictures with any camera (even 8 MP with terrible noise, a small sensor, and a fixed lens and no stabilization). Having a small camera that you like, which is easy to carry with you will result in more pictures and a better photographer.

But certain advancements in camera technology can help improve the keeper rate. The major improvements as I see them are in body stabilization and auto-focus. I recall back in 2009 seeing the first stabilized lenses come out, and maybe hearing about IBIS, but deciding it was too expensive. Now I think auto-focus is the next major advancement. That’s one thing older Olympus cameras still lack. Though the latest ones — the OM-1’s and now the OM-3 seem to have solid AF. It’s probably worth upgrading at some point.

My Journey with Cameras