Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at
Joined on Nov 22, 2010
About me:

I trained as a photographer on The Kent and Sussex Courier, a local newspaper in Kent, England. From there I worked for several regional newspapers before moving to London's Fleet Street in 1969.

I covered everything from wars, riots, disaster and mayhem through to Paris fashions and studio photography before going freelance and specializing in the music and showbusiness areas.

Some of my most enjoyable work was for Paul and Linda McCartney but I had a generally great time, often wondering why I got paid to do what I did.

I retired from photography in 1996 and worked as an internet consultant for a London IT company for a year before digital cameras relit my enthusiasm for my profession.

When Micro Four Thirds cameras came along, i embraced the technology and ethos behind them and started my Youtube channel covering all aspects of photography and the wonders of the Micro Four Thirds system.


Total: 17, showing: 1 – 17
In reply to:

Nikita66: Nice footage.
Regarding air travel, the lack of progress is disappointing. Basically, flight times between cities haven't changed since 1960. That's 57 years of no progress.

Sure, the SST for awhile, but the airlines basically shelved it because they didn't want to invest in it. Now that fuel costs are down, and in my opinion, down to stay, someone should reincarnate supersonic commercial flight.

Concorde was supersonic and operated from Europe starting in the 1970s. It was planned to fly it over land at supersonic speed but that idea was completely unrealistic. The sonic boom causes animals to panic, windows break and structural damage long term to buildings. This was an unacceptable price so that a few people could save a few hours.

Plus, you say that fuel costs are down. Aircraft take many, many years to develop and supersonic flight burns much, much more fuel than subsonic. Who could guarantee that fuel will still be cheap in10 or 20 years time?

Concorde was a beautiful plane that did everything that was asked of it. The problem was that it was not and could never be commercially viable. Ditto any new one. Twice the speed takes four times the fuel and the laws of physics cannot be changed to solve the sonic boom.

Also, now that passengers can connect to the internet and continue to work in transit, where is the commercial imperative for the time saving?

Link | Posted on Jun 17, 2017 at 10:34 UTC
In reply to:

Vivid1: Can you REALLY imagine a bunch of top Sports Illustrated photographers ditching their very reliable Canon or Nikon gear, which they have been using for years, just to switch to a body with 20fps? A body but with questionable AF and ZERO pro support. Go tell a top pro to use their 600/f4 or 400/2.8 lenses with a THIRD PARTY adapter and wade through TERRIBLE ergonomics to get the shot that puts bread on the table???

As you so rightly say Vivid1, the idea of professional photographers foregoing tried, tested and known equipment for a few extra frames per second is just too silly.

I showed a GH4 with Nocticron lens to some mates from AP (London). They were highly impressed with what it could do, especially the focus speed. The first thing they said was that it was great but "would it hold up in a war?". A pro service which will lend you lenses, fast turnaround repairs, prepare your camera for desert or antarctic use - those are what make a professional camera. Not high speed circus tricks for marketing purposes.

Enthusiast photographers are the people who want cameras with bells and whistles. Nothing wrong with that, they drive the market and innovation. The professional just wants cameras to work well enough and reliably. It's business.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 11:58 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Panasonic Leica 8-18mm F2.8-4 (165 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: Just waiting to see if it delivers. In particular, I have these 2 questions:

1. Does it cause purple spots on Olympus camera? And

2. Is the distortion going to be a problem?

If no problem with these, then the only question left is - is there still any reason to buy any of the 7-14mm lenses?

Such a huge problem that I've used one since they came out in all kinds of conditions and the lens new:-)

7 to 8mm is quite a jump in Micro Four Thirds. I bought the 7-14mm because I wanted an ultra wide angle. The old lens is well over 10% wider than the new one. In 35mm terms, it is the difference between 14mm and 16mm. That is a big difference for me, since I use the 7mm longth 99% of the time with this lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 10:12 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2016 (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Because I'm not Bill Gates & I feel the EM1 MII is $500 overpriced I'm staring to look @ the G85 as an upgrade to the EM1. Is G85 IQ & DFD a lot better than original EM1?

Both better but not a game changing amount. Mind you, that probably applies to the E-M1 Mk2 as well :-)

Of course, for DfD you need a Panasonic lens, though I find my Olympus 40-150 f/2/8,for example, works just as well as Panasonic lenses for A-FC, as I found in my review

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2017 at 13:09 UTC
On article Our favorite gear, rewarded: DPReview Awards 2016 (271 comments in total)

I don't have access to all the cameras that Dpreview do but I'm not surprised they picked the Panasonic G80/85. Of all the cameras I reviewed the G80 stood out as being simply the best all rounder.

It's hard to think of anything it can't do and the addition of really effective stabilization and a shutter that simply eliminates shutter shock makes it a hard act to follow.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 16:04 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1397 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kurt_K: One thing I'd like to know is how the CAF performance compares to that of the Panasonic G85. Is it a little better or a lot better?

I used to use Pentax cameras and have very high regard for them. Looking at DPReview's review of the K3 and comparing it to my experience with the GX8 and 100-400 Panasonic, I'd say the Panasonic is quite a bit better. (focus section at at 6m15s) Focusing performance of all recent Panasonics seems to be the same and in spite of Panasonic's lenses having DfD, the 40-150 Pro appears just as fast on the GX body.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 17:46 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1397 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kurt_K: One thing I'd like to know is how the CAF performance compares to that of the Panasonic G85. Is it a little better or a lot better?

No, both modes. In C-AF there's not a lot in it but in S-AF it is noticeable, I find. I must stress that under most circumstances the differences make little practical difference and are unnoticeable. It seems to me that the GXs better performance is down to more processing power re than anything else.

I reckon the E-M1 Mark 2 should be better than the GXs, again more to more sheer processing power than anything else.

Very specialist all of this, really. A lot of the time the photographer's ability to keep the focus point where he wants it is more influential than raw camera capability.

I'm always in two minds about all of this. Sooner or later there'll be a camera that has anything you want in focus all of them time. I'm not sure I'd like that. As with F1 racing, the technology potentially sucks the life out of the art. The Chinese say "be careful what you wish for, it might come true!"

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 13:39 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1397 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kurt_K: One thing I'd like to know is how the CAF performance compares to that of the Panasonic G85. Is it a little better or a lot better?

After a lot of testing over a lot of time under practical conditions, I can tell you that the follow focus of the Panasonic GX80 and GX8 is considerably better than the E-M1's.

That applies for the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 as well as Panasonic's own lenses. The S-AF is more incisive and works down to lower light levels too.

Bear in mind I am not reading about this and applying theory, strictly a great deal of day to day use with both makes available to me at the same time for comparison.

It remains to be seen whether the E-M1 mk2 is better in this respect as mine is still on order but if it does no more than match the GX8, I'd be happy.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 12:21 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (546 comments in total)
In reply to:

art99: The video rec/pause red button seems extremely small on the top. Can any camera manufacturer ever, ever, ever come up with having the camera larger, more comfortable shutter button ALSO be used as the video rec/pause button. Seems insignificant but extremely important to those that do a lot of video. What happened to the headphone out jack ? another seemingly unimportant omission.

Exactly. The shutter button can be set to video start/ stop only. You can also set it for shoot stills while video-ing. It's a choice.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2016 at 12:07 UTC
On article History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review (1063 comments in total)

Its main competitor is the Panasonic GX8, surely? It almost certainly uses the same sensor and is styled and presented in a very similar way.

I'm amazed that the Panasonic is not even mentioned - does anyone have any idea why?

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2016 at 10:16 UTC as 177th comment | 3 replies
On article Photokina 2012: Interview - Stephan Schulz of Leica (195 comments in total)
In reply to:

hydrospanner: When you can't (or don't want to) answer a valid, direct question...go ahead and insult the person that asked it. Wonderful.

I used Hasselblad, Rollei and Mamiya as well as 35mm in 35 years as a professional photographer.
Occasionally I would use MF for someone like Athena who wanted to reproduce my stuff poster size and thus the extra technical quality was necessary.
But mostly I used MF for the 'look' and 'feel' of the results. No-one seeing even a smallish 15x12 inch printed portrait would mistake the results from a Hasselblad and 150 or 250 Sonnar with those from a Nikon and appropriate lens.
The main thing, though, was that clients could tell the difference. That meant extra money in my bank account.
Anyone approaching MF from the point of view of simple pixel count/ sensor area is simply missing the point. And yes, it would imply that they have not used or do not understand MF.
Would anyone seriously think that Ansel Adams woud have taken the same pictures on 35mm as he did on his10x8 inch stand camera? No, of course not.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2012 at 08:14 UTC

>Users may have occurred problems


Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2012 at 11:18 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

bunfoolio: Goverment shoud just not be involved in issues such as this. What a waste of time, money, and ultimetly innovation in the industry.

I have applied a small hack to my GH2 which enables you to record for as long as you like within card space limitations.

It takes a couple of minutes and can be reversed at any time. It is freely available.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2012 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: I can't think of any famous Hollywood movie having a 30 minute single raw take...

... or any digital DSLR movie for that matter.

(unless you're filming growing grass...)

There may be, out there... possible.

The lack of imagination of some people is astonishing. There are many, many reasons why people would require >30min recording times.
I have just cycled part of the the Olympic cycle race route, for example. I film from a chest bracket mounted camera. Such a video requires continuous shooting for more than 30 mins.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 17:15 UTC
In reply to:

Donald Lam: Digicams are not designed to be a dedicated camcorder. The small battery will be hard pressed to record for more than 30 minutes. Heat sinking of the sensor and electronics is another issue.

>Rubbish, I've recorded continuously on my hacked GH1 for hours with no problems.

Ditto with my hacked GH2. I can also plug mine into the mains and get over 5hrs continuous AVCHD with a 32gb card.
The hack is simplicity itself to apply and can be removed any time.

Link | Posted on May 19, 2012 at 17:05 UTC
In reply to:

Bernd M: I don't understand why I'll have to pay US$ 5.700 for a Zeiss 135mm F2.1 when I could buy a Zeiss Sonnar T 135mm F1.8 for US$ 1.800. What makes the Cine Lens so much more expensiv? Can anybody tell me?

Some of the comments here just illustrate the massive gulf between amateur and professional photography.
Zeiss are producing these lenses to the highest standards, tailored to the needs of professional film makers. These lenses have little value to an amateur. Their precision manufacture and imaging is important to a professional and that is what they will be paying for.
What a fool you would be to make a twenty million dollar movie and quibble over a few thousand for a lens!

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2012 at 15:25 UTC
On article Leica includes Lightroom 4 with most camera purchases (35 comments in total)

I already use LR4 so bundling it with the M9 is not an asset but an on-cost for me.

They need to offer a price without the bundled LR. Why should I pay for something I don't need?

Unless Leica can convince me that Adobe do not charge them for their software and there is no cost to it for the customer. But I don't believe that to be so.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2012 at 16:53 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
Total: 17, showing: 1 – 17