A decision

It has been well over a month since I made a decision to shrink my photo gear, and managed to create a shortlist of cameras that I was considering.

Well, votes have been counted (there was one – mine), and a decision has been made.

Behold! The Sony A7R:



Let’s remind ourselves of the candidates: Leica, Sony, and Fujifilm.

Leica managed to price themselves out of the game early on. I believe that I would truly love a Leica, but at the end of the day I am simply insufficiently wealthy.

In fact, I am scared of Leicas now. I have avoided even handling a Leica camera for fear that I would like it too much. I tried not to look at them for too long when in the shop.

That left me with Sony and Fujifilm.

Sony won out after some handling on three criteria:


In my original comparison, I was comparing the size of the latest version of the Sony and Fujifilm cameras. Sony was definitely bigger – and that was a big drawback.

My analysis was faulty, however.

Sony’s first generation of mirrorless full frame cameras is still recent, still cutting edge, still has better specifications than Fuji or Leica … and is also smaller. My camera is approximately the same size (and perhaps a bit smaller) than its Fujifilm rivals. A Fuji advantage … gone.


One of Fuji’s big advantages was that it was less expensive.

Again, that comparison was with Sony’s second generation alpha 7 line. First generation? Not so much. The camera cost me a little more than a Fujifilm would have, but not by the significant margin I was originally expecting.


Surprisingly, I didn’t enjoy the way the Fujifilm cameras handled. I had expected I would, given that there are reviewers out there saying that Sony cameras were soulless machines that might have better specifications, but are definitely less fun.

Perhaps I didn’t give myself enough time in store to get accustomed to the controls. Perhaps it’s just not for me. But Fujis weren’t fun.

I love the way the Sony handles — I read lots of complaints online indicating that the second generation corrects an uncomfortable first generation design. I didn’t feel that way at all. I absolutely love the handling of this camera.


None of the above were the ‘nail in the coffin’, however – they all served to pull Sony even with Fuji, addressing most of the reasons I initially believed the Fujifilm cameras to be better.

The reason why Sony won out?



Sony have designed their cameras with other manufacturer’s lenses in mind. So I can just put my Nikon lenses on my new camera. And I can put Canon lenses on it, if there’s one I want. And Leica lenses.

Any lens for any SLR or DSLR camera ever made, I can use.

That’s wonderful, and that’s why I’ve ended up here.

And what kind of photos does it take? Pretty good ones, I think …


Finding photos: a camera shortlist

Last weekend, I wrote about downsizing my photo equipment, in an effort to actually ensure that I start to take a camera with me when I leave the house.

Well, we’re a weekend later, and I still don’t know what I’m going to buy. But I think I’ve figured out what I’m going to try.

So without further ado, the nominees:



Candidate one is the legendary Leica.


  • Cost. Leicas are expensive. If I sell all my gear, buy a used Leica with one (used) lens, I’ll probably also have to chip in some cash.
  • Weight. Many online reviews describe the Leica M as ‘a tank’. While it is definitely a less bulky option than my current DSLR setup, it weighs in above the other cameras in the shortlist. (Leica does sell other cameras, but I’m sure they’re not as good. That will bother me.) (I think.)
  • Is it that great? There are a surprising number of articles on the internet designed to convince the reader that the Leica is good branding on a mediocre camera.


Quality. There are endless articles detailing how [insert other camera here] is superior. They show you specifications. The other camera will have more megapixels. Or a tiltable screen. Or autofocus. They’ll tell you that it’s a less pleasant experience.

And then they’ll show you pictures. They will talk about the technical superiority of the non-Leica image. They’ll zoom in on something that you couldn’t see in the original photo to make their point. They’ll show you more noise at ISO 12800. They’ll claim the colour is more accurate on the other camera.


In every single picture in every single article, where the reviewer attempts to compose and take the same photograph twice, once on a Leica, and once on something else … and the picture taken with the Leica is better.

It’s crazy. It might not be sharper (it usually is). It might have more noise. Or ‘less accurate’ colour. But it’s always better.

I mean, what the hell. If it takes better pictures, it’s the better camera. That’s how these things work.

And I constantly prefer the images from the Leica.



Candidate number two is the full frame mirrorless Sony.


  • The look. I know. It’s not supposed to matter. But look at the other two candidates. Then look at this candidate. Yeah.
  • The size. The Leica might be heavier (barely), but the Sony is bigger — smaller than a DSLR, but the largest of the available bodies. Sony lenses are also bigger, on average, than their Leica or Fujifilm counterparts. If the goal is to go small, Sony might not achieve that.
  • Lenses. Size aside, Sony has the weakest choice of made-for-the-camera lenses.


The specification. There’s no doubt about it — the electronics in Sony’s cameras are superior. It performs more tricks, and performs them better, than other cameras. Hell, other camera manufacturers tend to use Sony’s parts. Sony gets them first.

Sony wins every side-by-side stat comparison hands down.



Candidate three. Fujifilm.


  • Sensor size. The Fujifilm X-series cameras do not have full frame sensors. (Some Leicas, to be fair, also do not.) (But they are inferior.) Full frame looks better.
  • Mixed reviews. These cameras have excellent reviews. Across the board. But comparisons always seem to have a but. With Leicas, the ‘but’ is the price. Sony cameras don’t get a ‘but’. The ‘but’ worries me. Adobe doesn’t handle the RAW format well. The colours look off. And so on.
  • Not the best camera. There are arguments that the Leica is the best camera in this list. There are arguments for the Sony. Fujifilm simply does not stack up, side-by-side. It may be the best value for money of the three. It may be the best fit for me. But it sure ain’t the best camera.


  • Cost. It’s by far the least expensive option here. I’ll be able to fully kit it, or pocket some money (probably) after selling my current Nikon gear.
  • Size. It’s smaller and lighter, by a fair amount. There’s a trade-off in sensor size and specs. But, it’s there.
  • Updates. Fujifilm has a reputation for releasing firmware updates that add new features and make huge improvements to their cameras. Sony and Leica only fix bugs, and leave the user to buy the next camera if they want the latest features.

The verdict?

Is yet to come.

Now I have to spend silly amounts of time playing with cameras in shops, while fending off salespeople.

The revolutionary coffee

If you follow the news, you have probably heard about the Jasmine Revolution that is being brutally crushed by the Chinese authorities.

But here’s an interesting take on it: it might not actually be happening. The authorities may just be randomly arresting people who are just out for a stroll, without a clue that a “revolution” is allegedly being fought.

The blogs and websites themselves are largely invisible to ordinary Chinese as the Great Firewall keeps them out, but they can be seen by the security agencies, who have been swift to react. The organizers, whoever and wherever they are, have repeatedly called on people to gather in a range of popular and public areas in the centre of major cities across China – shopping malls and university campuses – and go for a stroll every Sunday afternoon to call for minor political change. These public areas are, at that time of day, normally filled with young people and out-of-town domestic tourists, all now potential ‘protesters’. Now, because of the number of competing and overlapping security agencies, there is a lot of pressure on the local commanders to make some arrests and to show some success, but there are no genuine protesters, just some bemused local tourists and a lot of foreign journalists. So some young tourists get beaten up and taken away, and some journalists get smacked around.

Image by Michael Vincent Manalo. Found at My Modern Metropolis.
Webcomic is Virtual Shackles, by Jeremy Vinar and Mike Fahmie.

The iPad: Ripples and ramifications

The iPad. A few weeks ago, Apple announced their latest new product to much fanfare, and the Internet went wild. Some were saying it would be a “game changer”. Some thought it was a bust. Some made sanitary napkin jokes. Few said nothing.

But what is the iPad? Does it really change the game — and if so, what game? And how?

Apple’s previous game changers

The previous game changers from Apple have been the iPod and the iPhone. Each of these changed the way we interacted in a particular market.

The iPod was the first popular MP3 player, and its existence — together with the iTunes store — brought music lovers away from their CD collections and into the world of MP3s. It legitimized the format, and was the beginning of the end for the music industry’s status quo. The ripples from this are still being felt, with the RIAA launching regular lawsuits against customers who download music illegally.

The iPhone was the first non-business phone to truly integrate the web into a mobile device. The Blackberry might have been there first, but their business-oriented approach limited the audience. Suddenly, we are all walking around with the Internet in our pocket.

We might not all have iPods and iPhones. We may have Zunes, Droids, or a Nexus 1. But the fact that we have these things — and the reason for Apple’s primacy in these markets — is due to Apple either creating or recognizing unseen markets for these types of devices, and having those markets seemingly appear out of nothing, overnight.

What is the iPad?

In order to figure out if the iPad is a game changer, we first need to understand what it is. The iPod is a music player. The iPhone is a phone. While portable music players and mobile phones had been around for a long time, Apple’s approach to these changed our approach as consumers. If the iPad is to change a game, that game needs to be identified first. Apple does not have a history of new ideas, but of new, intuitive, approaches to old ideas.

A few things that the Internet tells us when we ask what the iPad is:
PC Magazine calls it “a gigantic iPod touch.”
This Is London calls it “a tablet PC.”
As a “tablet PC” is rather nondescriptive, was can turn to MTV, who call it “a hybrid between an iPhone and a full laptop”.

Apple themselves do not describe it. They instead talk about how good it is for web surfing, how thin it is, and how many Apps are available.

Given Apple’s approach, we at the Big Bad Blog tempted to declare it a “bust”, rather than a “game changer”. If it is only a big iPod Touch, then we already have those. Making a bigger one is not revolutionary, and will not change any games. Lacking true laptop functionality (which cheaper netbooks tend to have), while providing few (if any) features unavailable on the more portable pocket-sized versions of the device mean a niche market and little appeal.

However, things change if we stop defining the iPad based on features available in other Apple devices. If we stop considering it to be a big iPod, or a “tablet” device — variations of which have been around since the 1970s, and never found traction — and begin to consider it to be an eBook, things look different.

Now, eBooks might be a small game to change, but they are a game. The iPad has a 9.7-inch display, the same as that of Amazon’s Kindle DX (but larger than other Kindles and the Sony eReader, seen on the right), and comes with plans for an Apple bookstore similar to the iTunes music store. This is different. This has a target.

Why do the Kindle and the Sony eReader not interact with the internet? Allow you to use e-mail? Allow you to copy a quote and save it in a document file, spreadsheet or to Tweet it to the world? These are things that we would like an eBook to do. The iPad does this.

In fact, when we look at what’s new — a screen that is the same size as that for other eBooks, the book store plans, and the long battery life — they all seem designed to compete with the other eReaders out there, as opposed to having been by chance.

So the Big Bad Blog is declaring the iPad a game changer — but we might not notice, because the game is small and Apple seems afraid to call the iPad an eReader.

The future of the eBook

Which brings us to the eBook and the game that is to be changed. The publishing industry is already in upheaval — the Kindle and Sony eReader have gained enough of a market share (of avid readers) that book publishers are now beginning to worry about those same things that the music and movie industries have been worrying about for years. But they are also still fairly rare — you might not even know anybody who has one.

The reason is that they are expensive and limited in functionality. If you only read Twilight books and Dan Brown novels, it’s a waste of money — particularly given that publishers are pushing for new eBooks (meaning the content) to cost $14.99, on top of the price already paid for the reader itself.

The iPad might be expensive as well — in fact, even moreso — but there’s an intermediate level of reader out there — ones who do not read a new book every week, but do read regularly beyond the bestseller list. A flashier, fancier device could cause these people to consider making a purchase that they would not have made otherwise.

Here at the Big Bad Blog, we think this will happen. While the change will not be as fast as with the ubiquitous mobile phone — many are still hesitant to leave paper behind — in ten years, people will think that books that do not allow their readers to send an e-mail or make a call on Skype are primitive.

Students will lead the change

Why ten years? Because we need a group of students who move through University with eBooks in their pockets to enter the workforce and disperse.

The huge advantage that eBooks have is with those who carry around multiple books. One book? No different. Five books? Big difference. University students have reading lists, textbooks, books checked out of the library for research on a paper. Books that they have to stay in the library with in order to research a paper.

Imagine, if you will, the student with an iPad.

This student can choose a place to sit: The library, at home, the coffee shop, under a tree in the quad between classes. Wherever they are comfortable. They can pull out their iPad.

They check the assignment on the course’s webpage. They then do a bit of online research to find what references will be useful. They go to the Apple Bookstore — or even the University Library’s page of books that students can checkout as eBooks — and get the required references. They read them, occasionally flipping over to the word processing App to make notes or copy a quote over. They pull up e-mail again, before heading off to their next class, and send a note to their professor with a question that has come up about the assignment.

The student runs off to class, and pulls up the course textbook on their iPad. Or the reading material being discussed that day.

The iPad is the student’s dream. All their textbooks, in one 1.5 pound device. Plus interactivity, e-mail, word processing, the Internet. Add in games, YouTube and recreational uses and you have something that is well worth the asking price.

What needs to happen to win the race

We at the Big Bad Blog have yet to see the device that will clearly become the leading ubiquitous eReader. Amazon and Sony have a headstart, but Apple’s vision is closer to the one that might successfully repeat the experience of the iPod as the top portable music player, or of Windows as the top operating system.

We at the Big Bad Blog think the key is the student population. They are the ones for whom an eReader which does not limit itself to the reading of books can become a necessity, rather than an expensive bookshelf full of DRM-limited titles. As the students graduate into the workforce, the next generation of adults will be accustomed to eBooks and have already made a choice regarding their favourite brand.

The success story will not be easy. A few things need to be done to find the hearts of students, and bring eBooks into an academic setting as the norm, rather than the exception:

Versatility: This is where the iPad has a head start. Holding all the books you need is useful, but not enough — word processing, e-mail, and the Internet all need to be available if the eBook is to be the defacto portable tool for the student. Games and videos are needed if the eBook is expected to become something they love, rather than a versatile textbook.

Multitasking: Websites everywhere have taken Apple to task over the lack of multitasking on the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Apple has happily ignored them — it helps to make the devices secure, while not truly limiting their functionality. The nature of the way we use the small portable devices makes multitasking unnecessary, in the end. This will not be true for the iPad, or eBooks in general. A student will find themselves needing one (or more) books open, the word processor open, and perhaps a chat with other students they are working with. The device that will win a student heart needs this functionality. If the next generation of iPad does not introduce multitasking, it might be a device that changes the game by revealing the true potential of eBooks, but becomes irrelevant itself shortly thereafter.

NCBI, PubMed and Journals: There are certain sites and many publications that publish the research that students and academics need to use. eBook makers need to look at these, and ensure that these can be easily accessed by those using their products. The ability for a student to search through articles in academic journals cannot be undervalued.

The University Library: University libraries are the traditional source of material for students. Putting deals in place that allow for students to “check out” eBooks “owned” by their University library can give an eBook a strong leg up on their competition, along with potential revenue from the University library. Checked out eBooks could contain DRM, and only be accessible for a limited period — two weeks, for example — before they expired.

The Google Factor: Google has been leading the way at moving old books over to digital. Because of this, any successful courtship has to have Google as a partner. Or will Google step in with their version of an eBook, leveraging the work that they have already done? As much as the iPad looks to change the future of the eBook, old texts and searching technology will be valuable to the academic community. If we are right about the student population being the gateway to leading the market, Google could quite well step in with their own device and change the marketplace dramatically.

The Big Bad Verdict

The iPad is a game changer — but it could also be a bust, if it is not marketed properly, or fails takes on a life of its own beyond Apple’s current (apparent) marketing plans.

So long as it is viewed as a “big iPod”, a competitor to Netbooks, or a successor to the unsuccessful tablets that have occasionally surfaced over the past forty years, it will be a bust. It does too little that is new, at what is still too high a price point.

But other eBook makers will have taken note already. Eventually one of these — or an unseen competitor that has not yet revealed themselves — will create a device that properly meets the needs of University students. That device will gain traction and become a market leader.

And ten years after that, paper books will be like records. The connoisseur might prefer them. The collector might have shelves full of them. The rest of us — who are around now and reading — will remember them fondly. Future generations will not understand references such as “paperback”.