Good article on issues faced when photographing art at a museum

I was organizing some of my photos up at Flickr and noticed this link to a very good article about photographing art in museums. I would take exception with some of the technical comments made about suggested equipment and settings, however.

It begins by recommending the Canon 40D DSLR. I would not argue about image quality, precision lens, and good image stabilization. However, I definitely disagree that you cannot obtain the same features from a quality point and shoot camera as I think I have demonstrated during my photo shoots in a number of the world's most famous museums.

My reason for using point and shoot cameras over DSLRs is weight, cost, and ease-of-use. My High-ISO camera of choice is the Fujifilm Finepix F30. It produces very acceptable images (considering relatively low noise level) shooting with the ISO preset to the maximum of 3200. It is also a compact 3X zoom that fits nicely in my purse without carrying around a large camera bag full of extra lenses. Although the Fujifilm does not have image stabilization, it's high ISO makes it possible to use higher shutter speeds to minimize camera shake. I also recommend using the Macro setting when shooting in museums because it provides images with finely detailed texture.

My Panasonic FZ8 also shoots relatively low noise images up to ISO 400 (It advertises ISO of 1600 but images are much too noisy at that level. I initially tried ISO 800 but didn't find the noise level acceptable at that level either) It has a 12X zoom and is also small and lightweight for a superzoom camera. The Panasonic has an excellent image stabilization system so I can work with slower shutter speed settings than the Fuji which I need to do since the ISO setting is not as high as the Fuji. I also set my Panasonic to the Auto-Focus with Macro setting for texture detail.

I was quite honestly dumbfounded when the article mentioned shooting without flash or tripod at a shutterspeed setting of 1/20 of a second. Way too slow even with excellent image stabilization for an older photographer like me who must compensate for a familial tremor. I read that you can try to use the time delay function to compensate for pressing the shutter and even burst mode to try to increase your chances of getting a "tack sharp" shot but I personally would not risk it at less than 1/60 of a second without flash or tripod.

As for cost, I prefer to save my money to afford traveling to world class museums instead of spending over $1200 for a camera (body only in the case of the Canon) instead of less than $300 for either the Panasonic or the Fuji. Perhaps this decision makes me less of a "professional" but I think it is the most practical for me.

Canon Powershot S5 vs. Panasonic DMC-FZ8

I've been in a bit of a quandary ever since I went ahead and ordered the Panasonic DMC-FZ8 in time for my first New York trip even though I heard that Canon was coming out with a new Powershot High-Zoom camera soon after I would return. Today, I finally got around to reading Digital Photography's review of the new Canon Powershot S5 paying particular attention to the comparisons of ISO-Sensitivity and noise levels since my most demanding work is produced in museums without the benefit of flash or tripod. DPReview didn't provide a side-by-side comparison of Canon vs. Panasonic so I had to improvise:


My eyes are getting older these days but it looks to me like the Panasonic suffers from less noise than the S5 although there is a slight loss of detail. Actually, to be honest, the Sony DSC-H9 & Sony DSC-H5 seemed to have roughly the equivalent level of noise of the Panasonic with a little more detail than the Panasonic. All three appear to me to outperform the Canon S5 in this category.

As a former financial officer I also can't help but think about bang for the buck. The Panasonic cost me $269 compared to the Sony's $369 and the Canon's $469. The Panasonic is the only one of the three that can output in Raw format, has about twice as many scene modes, and weighs a mere 310 g compared to the Sony's 407 g and the Canon's 450 g. For someone like me with a problem with familial tremor, 100 -150 g can make a big difference especially if you couple that with one of the industry's leading image stabilization systems.

So, I guess I made the right choice for me based on my needs. I just wish Panasonic would be able to approach the High ISO quality output of the Fuji F-30. I have governed the Panasonic down to ISO-800 in my settings because the noise level is just totally unacceptable at the Panasonic's ISO settings higher than that. So, I keep my Fuji F30 with me too for those really dark exhibits.

The importance of lens stabilization in new digital cameras

I've always found David Pogue's technology articles interesting and have now had the pleasure of meeting him when I attended two of his workshops. At the photography workshop I attended he mentioned that image stabilization systems come in two flavors, in-camera, and in-lens, but he had no particular opinion about the value of one over the other except that in-lens systems increase the cost of removable lenses on DSLRs. However, in this article he points out what the digital camera producers say about each type:

"Canon and Nikon, which takes the same approach [in-lens stabilizers], argue, however, that in-body stabilizers are far less effective, because they can’t be tailored for the focal length of each individual lens. For example, you need more stabilization at long focal lengths (zoomed in) than short ones. Canon and Nikon say that with an in-lens stabilizer, you can make the aperture four stops smaller without changing the shutter speed, versus about two stops on an in-camera system. Furthermore, only lens-based systems show the stabilized image through the viewfinder."

I recently bought a new camera but opted for a Panasonic FZ-8, a so-called "point-and-shoot" model with a 12X optical zoom lens. I prefer to consider my lens-changing days in my film camera past. I'm more interested in concentrating on composition and the more creative aspects of digital photography than manhandling a lot of "gear". My photography needs are also a bit distinct as well. I am building an image archive of art, history, and science images for faculty to use in the classroom so I photograph thousands of museum exhibits in an environment where I am prohibited from using flash or tripod. For this reason, I use a Fujifilm F30 camera for low-light conditions because it produces excellent images in those conditions with minimal grain (even at ISO 3200) that can usually be practically excised using Photoshop's noise reduction and median functions.

The Panasonic gives me a versatile camera for outdoor detail work with its 12X zoom Also it gives me an Intelligent ISO mode for less than optimum lighting conditions With its excellent image stabilization, I can capture some indoor subjects (such as decently lit lighter-colored statues or reliefs) with more detail than the Fuji. I can almost hand-hold a shot at 1/15 shutterspeed with the Panasonic while I must set my minimum shutter speed on the Fuji to 1/60 because of its lack of image stabilization. The Panasonic, too, can be set up to an ISO of 3200 but I have found that anything above 400 with the Panasonic is too grainy for my taste.