Article: Confessions of a Happy Pro-1 User

Introduction

After years of doing black and white zone system photography using 4x5 and the Pentax 67 system, and with a worsening back problem from an old college sports injury, I wanted to find a lighter weight system and also move away from the darkroom and chemicals, so I began experimenting with digital cameras. In 2004, after several years and several cameras, I began using an 8mp Canon Pro-1 with 2/3 sensor (8.8 x 6.6mm).

The Pro-1 is designed for real photographers - people who understand the principles and want to actually use the camera's various features. Most of my work is with a tripod, and bending over to look through a viewfinder in odd positions sometimes hurts my back. The Pro-1's swivel monitor lets me use it in more comfortable positions, like a miniature view camera. Also, the button and menu system and other features are really excellent.

It is a very intuitive system that's a joy to work with. In essence, the camera becomes "invisible" in that it doesn't get in the way of the work (I had full a featured 4mp camera once that I rarely used because it was always a battle against the camera, which seemed cleverly designed to make everything as difficult as possible). When using the Pro-1 all you think about is the photography.

The Canon Pro-1

When the Pro-1 was first announced I got excited because of its features, but I was soon dismayed by all the complaints about noise and other things. For two months I read every review and user report I could find, trying to decide whether to buy one. I finally got one and, while I think all the complaints are valid, I am very happy with it. Like any camera, the Pro-1 has strengths and weaknesses. Fortunately for me the strengths favor my kind of work. Here are the reasons for my decision:

1) Most DSLRs are heavier and don't have preview screens.

2) The Pro-1 has the swivel screen and the well-loved Canon Powershot menu system, and of course the 8mp sensor, the 28-200 "L" lens, and a 2" view screen.

3) After downloading and printing sample Pro-1 images from dpReview.com I knew that the lens and sensor combination would give me images of acceptable technical quality for my work. The lens is superb and I can make smooth and grainless 11x14 prints with no jaggies and none of the artifacts that give prints that "digital look".

Do We need ISO 200 and 400?

The biggest complaint is that ISO 200 and 400 are too noisy, which is true. For someone who wants really fine quality results those settings are essentially useless. However, in using small sensor cameras I found that most shots were done with ISO 50, a few at 100, and none at 200 or 400. The reason for this is the greater depth-of-field from the small sensor.

For example, my most often used Pentax 67 lens was 135mm. At f/32 the DOF range is 17' to Infinity. The 35mm equivalent is 67mm, which is about 17mm on the Pro-1. Here are the DOF ranges and hyperfocal distances for the 17mm focal length at Pro-1 apertures:

Focal                        Hyperfocal
Length   f/stop    DOF      Distance
------------------------------------------
17mm      3.2    18.8'-Inf      38'
17mm      4.0    14.9'-Inf      30'
17mm      4.5    13.4'-Inf      27'
17mm      5.6    10.5'-Inf      21'
17mm      6.3     9.4'-Inf      18'
17mm      7.1     8.4'-Inf      17'
17mm      8.0     7.5'-Inf      15'

(Note: Because DOF depends on many lens characteristics, these figures
are approximate. They are based on a COC value of .008)

Note: These figures were generated using Dudak's Depth-of-Field Calculator found at this web site
(thank you John Dudak for the fine service).

So even at f/4.0, with the same lens perspective I'm getting greater DOF than I got at f/32 with the P67. I shoot Tri-X at ISO 200, so at ISO 50 the Pro-1 is two stops slower. But f/4.0 is 5 stops faster than f/32, so I'm actually 3 stops ahead, with shutter speeds equivalent to shooting the P67 at ISO 1600. In practical terms, in bright light where at ISO 200 and f/32 the P67 will shoot at 1/60, the Pro-1 with the same perspective and greater DOF will shoot at 1/500.

So for someone who's greatest concern is DOF, the Pro-1 is terrific. For someone who does lots of action and/or low light shooting and really needs the higher ISO, the noise is a bigger issue. Nevertheless, there is still some advantage gained by the extra DOF. Let's look at a 35mm example.

Someone who shoots 35mm film with a 35mm lens gets about 4 ft to Infinity at f/16. With the Pro-1 lens at 9 mm for the equivalent focal length, we get about the same DOF at f/4.0, a 4 stops faster aperture. Assuming 400 speed film, at ISO 50 we are 3 stops slower, but that leaves us still 1 stop ahead of the film camera. So at an equivalent lens perspective and DOF range, the Pro-1 at ISO 50 is actually about 1 stop faster than a 35mm camera with 400 film, or about equal to using 800 speed film. At ISO 100 we are about equal to using 1600 speed film (without the grain). Not too shabby. We just have to remember not to use 35mm-type DOF settings. We can shoot wide open or close to it a great deal of the time.

Street Shooting

How about street shooting? I enjoy doing that that now and then, so I decided to give the Pro-1 a try. An old trick street shooters use to eliminate focusing is to pre-focus at a hyperfocal distance which gives the fullest possible depth-of-field range. A favorite focal length of street shooters is 35mm. The Pro-1 equivalent is about 9mm, so here are the DOF ranges and hyperfocal distances for that:

Focal                       Hyperfocal
Length   f/stop    DOF      Distance
------------------------------------------
9mm       2.8    5.9'-Inf    11.8'
9mm       4.0    4.2'-Inf     8.5'
9mm       5.6    2.9'-Inf     5.9'
9mm       7.1    2.3'-Inf     4.7'
9mm       8.0    2.1'-Inf     4.2'

(Note: Because DOF depends on many lens characteristics, these figures
are approximate. They are based on Dudak's calculator with a COC value of .008)

By setting the Pro-1 to Manual Focus at 9mm and pre-focusing at about 9 ft., @ f/4 we get everything from about 4 ft. to infinity in focus. So no more worries about slow auto focus - just turn it off.

Exposure settings are more of a challenge. Experimenting with manual and auto exposure, I don't see any difference in shutter lag (there is about a 1/2 second delay in both cases), so we might as well use auto exposure and not have to worry about that. This frees us to concentrate totally on composition and the "decisive moment".

In addition to the shutter lag, the viewfinder goes black for over a second during the exposure. These "features" are of course unacceptable to a serious street shooter used to a mechanical range finder camera. There is no way the Pro-1 will fill that role. But what about those of us who do a little street shooting now and then...can the Pro-1 be used to get some good shots and do effective work? To find out, I used the Pro-1 in the above manner for about two hours downtown one afternoon. I kept it in my right hand with the strap around my wrist, quickly bringing it to eye and shooting, without any concern for focus or exposure. I noticed that by the end of that time my sense of timing was adapting to the shutter lag, and I quickly got used to the EVF. I used it at ISO 50 and got several good shots, and the image quality is superb. I think that with practice the Pro-1 can be a decent street machine.

Portrait Work

One of the common complaints about small sensor digicams is that we can't make portraits with soft backgrounds due to the extensive depth-of-field. Actually we can if we make use of the Pro-1's features and apply a bit of DOF knowledge.

The obvious solution is to use the widest aperture available. Unless we are doing a full length portrait, a focal length of 50mm (actual 12.7) is about as short as we can go and get pleasing perspective. There is also a large increase in DOF below 50mm, so we want to avoid shorter lengths for that reason, too. The largest aperture available at 50mm is 3.2. It shifts to 3.5 at 85mm (in 35mm equivalent terms).

At a subject distance of 8' we can make anything from 3/4 length at 50mm to head and shoulder shots at 135mm,with pleasing perspective. So if full length is not desired, 8' seems like a good useful subject distance.

We know that DOF is dependent on focal length, aperture and focus point. Decreasing subject distance, increasing focal length, and increasing aperture will all reduce DOF. Longer subject distances are preferable for portraits, so it's best to choose a longer lens rather than shorten the distance

So in a nutshell, the solution is to increase the aperture and focal length as much as possible. The Pro-1's extended zoom range allows us a wide range of possibilities.

Click here to see a Pro-1 available light portrait that won grand prize in a contest last year. The subject distance was 8-10', 1/40 @ f/3.5, lens at 170mm. The background elements are pleasantly soft without being so blurry as to be distracting.

Conclusion

Small sensor digicams are a different breed of camera and they require building new instincts and a new mental database of depth-of-field and hyperfocal distances. We can't apply our old aperture/DOF instincts, deeply embedded from years of shooting film. Taking the greater DOF into account, at ISO 50 and 100 we actually have the equivalent of 800 or 1600 speed film.

This Pro-1 8mp 2/3 sensor camera is extraordinary. We have a pixel count equal to the mid-range DLSRs, which allows us to make large grainless prints without jaggies or pixellation, and allows some cropping if needed. We have an "L" class lens which produces images requiring less sharpening, which reduces edge halos and other artifacts, eliminating the "digital look". We have a high speed machine that is like 800 or 1600 speed film without the grain. We have a completely silent picture maker. We have the convenience of smaller size, lighter weight, a preview screen and lower cost, compared to DSLRs. The primary trade-off for all this is the limited ISO range. Not too bad a deal. The image quality doesn't match the best DSLRs, but it's getting close (see comparison of the Pro-1 and the MKII).

The Pro-1 is an extremely capable camera if time is taken to learn and master it. I think that anyone who dedicates themselves to it could use the Pro-1 very effectively for many different kinds of photography. For me it is a joy to work with and I'm getting very high image quality.

The End