I have always had a slightly complicated relationship with Leica's Q cameras. I loved shooting with the Leica Q2 Reporter when I reviewed it around its launch, and I have spent plenty of time with the Leica Q3 as well. Both are exceptional cameras in their own right, but there was always one thing stopping me from completely falling for them: that 28mm lens.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Leica's Summilux 28mm f/1.7 ASPH. In fact, optically it is superb, and on both the Q2 and Q3 it makes for an incredibly capable combination. The problem was simply me. At the time, I was almost exclusively a 50mm shooter, so moving to 28mm always felt like I was standing just a little too far away from the photograph I actually wanted to make. The camera was brilliant, but the way it saw the world did not quite match the way I did. The Q2 and Q3 could simulate longer focal lengths through their crop modes, but I always wanted that tighter field of view to be there optically from the start. Then, in September 2024, Leica threw something of a curveball.

Rather than simply updating the Q3 again or releasing another special edition, Leica launched the Q3 43. Fundamentally, it was the Q3 that people already knew, complete with its 60MP full-frame sensor, autofocus system and compact form, but on the front was something completely new: an APO-Summicron 43mm f/2 ASPH. fixed lens. Suddenly the Q was no longer a camera that effectively told you that 28mm was the Leica way of seeing the world. There was another choice. And for me, that changed everything.

I had always thought that if Leica produced a Q with something closer to a 50mm lens, it would make far more sense for the way I photograph. Leica did not quite give us 50mm, but I actually think its decision to go with 43mm was more interesting. The company reasoned that 43mm provides a perspective close to natural human vision, allowing the photographer to see something, raise the camera, and photograph it with relatively little change in perspective. Leica described the focal length as closely mirroring natural perception, and while arguments about exactly which focal length best represents human eyesight will probably continue forever, I completely understood what Leica was trying to achieve.

It also meant Leica did not simply take the existing Q3 and bolt a longer version of the same lens onto it. The APO-Summicron 43mm f/2 ASPH. gave the camera a completely different identity. Some photographers inevitably questioned why Leica had gone from the f/1.7 Summilux on the 28mm Q3 to an f/2 Summicron, but I think that misses the point slightly. This was an apochromatically corrected lens designed specifically for the Q3 43, and Leica clearly wanted outright optical performance as much as outright speed. The company says the lens was engineered to deliver high sharpness and contrast even at its maximum f/2 aperture. More importantly, it opened the Q system up to photographers like me.

Twenty-eight millimetres is fantastic for environmental work, travel, street photography and situations where you want to place a subject firmly within its surroundings. But not everybody sees photographs that way. Some of us naturally isolate things. We see a person across the road, a detail on a building or a moment happening slightly further into a scene and instinctively want to tighten the frame. With 43mm, the Q suddenly allowed you to do that without immediately reaching for a digital crop. That, I believe, is why the Q3 43 mattered far beyond being another Leica launch.

To be clear, Leica did not invent the idea of putting a more normal focal length onto a premium fixed-lens camera. Ricoh had already launched the Ricoh GR IIIx in 2021 with a 40mm-equivalent lens, specifically in response to photographers wanting an alternative to the 28mm GR III. What Leica did differently was take that idea into the very top end of the market and prove that photographers were prepared to spend serious money on it. I do not have Leica's internal sales figures, so I cannot tell you categorically how many Q3 43 bodies were sold compared with the regular Q3. But I can tell you what I saw.

Around the launch, getting hold of one appeared incredibly difficult. Stock disappeared, retailers had waiting lists, and for a while the Q3 43 seemed to be one of those cameras that people were desperate to find. Then something happened that really stuck with me. I was out shooting in London not long after launch and saw six Leica Q3 43 cameras being used in a single day. A week or so later, I saw another two being used on a beach in Cornwall.

Eight cameras might not sound remarkable when you are talking about Canon, Sony or Nikon, where thousands upon thousands of bodies are circulating. But eight examples of the same brand-new Leica, a camera costing several thousand pounds, appearing in front of me within roughly a week? That got my attention.

It suggested to me that the Q3 43 was reaching beyond the traditional Leica audience. These did not feel like cameras being bought simply because somebody wanted another Leica for the collection. The Q3 43 made sense as a standalone photographic tool, and I suspect it brought plenty of photographers into the Leica ecosystem who might never have considered an M camera or an interchangeable-lens SL. That is where I think its wider influence becomes particularly interesting.

Within months, the premium fixed-lens camera market suddenly felt far more important. Fujifilm unveiled the GFX100RF in March 2025, taking its 102MP large-format sensor and putting it into the first fixed-lens GFX camera. Its native lens remained a 28mm-equivalent design, so it was not copying the Q3 43's focal length, but the philosophy was remarkably familiar: take extremely high image quality, pair the sensor permanently with a carefully optimised prime lens and build the whole thing into a camera that photographers could carry without an interchangeable-lens system.

Then Sony returned to a category it had effectively left dormant for almost a decade. In July 2025, it launched the Sony RX1R III, combining a 61MP full-frame sensor with a fixed 35mm f/2 Zeiss lens. Sony even added Step Crop Shooting for 35mm, 50mm and 70mm framing, leaning heavily into the idea that a high-resolution sensor and one exceptional fixed prime could provide more flexibility than the words "fixed lens" might initially suggest.

Can I prove that Leica's Q3 43 caused Fujifilm to build the GFX100RF or persuaded Sony to resurrect the RX1R? No, and development cycles mean those cameras would almost certainly have been taking shape long before the Q3 43 reached customers. But I do think Leica helped validate where the market was heading. It showed there was serious appetite for an expensive, highly specialised camera that deliberately removed the choice of interchangeable lenses and instead concentrated on giving photographers one excellent way of seeing. That is an important distinction.

For years, camera development was largely about giving us more. More lenses, more focal lengths, more megapixels, more video modes, more autofocus modes and more buttons. Cameras like the Q3 43 work almost in the opposite direction. They give you an incredibly capable sensor and then deliberately restrict one of the biggest choices a photographer normally has. Here is your lens. Here is your field of view. Now go and make photographs. And photographers clearly embraced that.

Today, the situation is very different from those first frantic months after launch. In the UK, major retailers now show the Q3 43 either in stock or available in limited quantities rather than with the long waits that surrounded it early on. Park Cameras currently lists it as in stock, while Wex has recently shown limited stock. It has gone from being the Leica everybody appeared to be hunting for to an established part of the Q family.

I think that is perhaps the greatest compliment you can give it. The Q3 43 did not feel like a novelty that Leica produced simply because it could. It became a genuine alternative to the regular Q3. And that changed the conversation around fixed-lens cameras.

The question was no longer simply whether you could live with a fixed lens. It became which fixed lens you wanted.

That sounds like a small difference, but I think it is enormous. Leica effectively turned focal length into a model choice rather than a limitation. Instead of choosing between a compact camera and an interchangeable-lens camera, photographers could start choosing between different interpretations of the same compact-camera philosophy.

The original Q3 remains an incredible camera and, for photographers who naturally see the world at 28mm, it probably remains the better choice. But for those of us who always wanted to step slightly closer without physically doing so, the Q3 43 finally made the Q concept click.

I wanted a Q with a tighter lens for years. Leica eventually gave me one, just not quite the 50mm I expected. And in doing so, I think it helped reshape what the premium compact camera could be.

Shop Leica Q3 43

The memory crisis is showing no signs of stopping. For photographers and tech consumers alike, it’s an alarming time. I bought a Nintendo Switch 2 this month; I’d been mulling over the idea for a while, but an impending price increase strong-armed my decision. Then a colleague of mine bought an Apple MacBook Neo for his daughter’s birthday, and I was surprised to find it had increased by $100/£100.

All across the consumer tech industry, prices are increasing. And although the memory crisis isn’t solely to blame – tariffs, component shortages, and a rising cost of living – it’s having a huge impact. As a photographer, it’s especially worrying because we rely heavily on storage. Memory cards and SSD drives were expensive enough – now they’re through the roof!

But a strange byproduct of all this is that I now find what I once considered aging tech – the humble SD card – to be an absolute lifesaver. Don’t get me wrong, many SD card prices have risen exponentially, too. But they still pale in comparison to XQD and CFexpress prices.

Thankfully, all but the very pro-tier, flagship cameras tend to have either an SD card slot or a dual SD and CFexpress slot. And I have to wonder if that trend will continue as long as the memory crisis. It seems remarkable to me now that Nikon launched its full-frame mirrorless Z mount back in 2018, with two cameras that only contained a single XQD/CFexpress slot.

I mean, cameras are expensive enough as it is, but now the camera and the lens and the spare battery aren’t enough. You’ve got to spend $100/£100+ on a CFexpress card. Don’t get me wrong, CFexpress cards are certainly preferable to their SD card counterparts. They’re faster, more robust and more reliable. But they’re also a lot more expensive.

There is another angle, and that’s built-in storage. I’ve just recorded another episode of Bokeh Face: The Digital Camera World Podcast, and in our Gear Up section we talked about the Sigma BF. Not only is it a gorgeous-looking camera with some impressive specs, but it also doesn’t have a memory card slot. Instead, it has 230GB of internal memory.

Don’t get me wrong, a device with built-in memory isn't immune to the memory crisis, but at least you don’t have to worry about buying a collection of cards. And in 2026, a few CFexpress cards could set you back $400/£400+. That’s madness!

You might also like...

Want more of my ramblings? Orwellian UK government pamphlet contradicts police on photography law. Imagine if Martin Parr had been prevented from taking photos in public. Modern autofocus isn’t the cheat code everyone says it is – you can still miss regularly. “Vertical video is driving me INSANE” says sports videographer. And no, open gate isn’t necessarily the answer…

For years, I thought finding your photographic style was something that happened naturally. You shot enough pictures, used enough cameras, tried enough lenses and, eventually, there it was. Your look. Your voice. Something that made an image unmistakably yours. But for me, that moment only really arrived when I stopped shooting in color.

That decision was not some short-lived experiment either. I have now been shooting predominantly in monochrome for more than four years, and I genuinely have not looked back. What started as a creative change quickly became the way I wanted to see the world through a camera. The longer I have stuck with it, the more natural it has become, to the point where I often find myself seeing scenes in black and white before I even raise the camera to my eye.

That might sound strange coming from someone who spent years working as a professional sports photographer. Back then, color was fundamental to what I did. The colors of the shirts, the advertising boards, the floodlights, the crowd, and the atmosphere were all part of telling the story. Sports photography is about immediacy, and color helps place you right there in the moment. I never really questioned it because it was simply part of the job.

But my photography has changed considerably since then. These days, I am far more interested in documenting the world around me. I want to photograph ordinary places, people, buildings, landscapes and little fragments of everyday life that might not appear particularly important today, but could become incredibly important in 20, 30 or 50 years. And strangely, removing color from those photographs has made me see those subjects more clearly than ever before.

Once I committed myself to monochrome, I started looking at light differently. I began noticing shadows, textures, shapes, and contrast rather than whether the colors within a scene worked together. I have deliberately pushed towards a heavier, higher-contrast black-and-white style, with deep blacks and strong highlights, and it has completely changed the way I approach a photograph. Instead of simply recording what is in front of me, I find myself thinking much more about how the scene will translate into tones.

That change did not happen overnight. Over the past four years, my eye has gradually adapted to the way I now want my photographs to look. I notice strong shafts of light falling across a pavement, the separation between a dark coat and a pale wall, the texture of an old stone building or the way mist flattens a distant landscape. These are the things that now catch my attention, and in many ways I think monochrome has trained me to be more selective and more deliberate.

There is also something wonderfully timeless about monochrome photography. I can photograph something this morning and, under the right conditions, the resulting image could almost have been made 40 or 50 years ago. Obviously, the world leaves clues about when a photograph was taken – cars, clothes, road signs and architecture all give the game away eventually – but black and white somehow removes that immediate timestamp that color can bring. It turns a contemporary photograph into something that already feels slightly archival.

That timeless quality has become increasingly important to me because I no longer want my photographs simply to say, “this is what this place looked like today.” I want them to feel like records. I want someone to be able to look at them decades from now and see not just a location, but a way of life, a mood and a moment that no longer exists in quite the same way.

That is probably why monochrome increasingly feels more documentary to me. I know that is entirely subjective, and documentary photography certainly does not need to be black and white, but when I look at the photographers whose work I find myself returning to, there is often a simplicity and permanence that comes from stripping away color. James Ravilious is a particularly good example. His photographs of rural England were not simply beautiful images of the countryside; they became records of communities, working lives, and ways of living that were gradually changing around him.

That idea resonates enormously with how I want to photograph now. I live in a part of England where so much still feels connected to an older way of life, but I am also very aware that it will not remain that way forever. Old buildings disappear. Independent shops close. Farms change. Villages expand. Traditional pubs are refurbished beyond recognition or vanish altogether. The things we walk past every day without thinking can suddenly become historically significant the moment they are gone.

The modern world moves incredibly quickly, and that makes me want to photograph these things while they are still here. It might be an old sign painted onto the side of a building, a farmer working in a field, a village shop that has barely changed in decades, or simply the way people gather in a particular place. None of these things necessarily feel important when you are standing in front of them, but photography has a wonderful habit of making the ordinary valuable with the passing of time.

And that is where I think monochrome has given my photography a greater sense of purpose. I am no longer simply waiting for beautiful light and making a nice photograph of something because it looks attractive. I am trying to make a record of it. Shooting in black and white somehow encourages me to treat even the most ordinary subjects with a little more seriousness, as though I am creating an archive rather than simply filling a memory card.

There is another benefit too. Removing color removes a distraction. A bright red car, a fluorescent shop sign, or someone wearing an especially vivid jacket can completely dominate a color photograph, even when that was never what initially interested me about the scene. In monochrome, those elements become shapes and tones instead, allowing me to decide what really matters within the frame.

That simplicity has also made me much more confident in my editing. I am no longer endlessly tweaking color temperature, saturation, or individual hues, trying to make an image feel right. My decisions are now much more focused around contrast, exposure, and tonality. Do I want the shadows to fall into darkness? Should that highlight remain bright? Does the image need more separation between the subject and the background? Those choices feel far more connected to the photograph itself rather than simply its color palette.

Perhaps most importantly, monochrome has finally given me the photographic eye I have been searching for. I now recognize the scenes I want before I even lift the camera. Harsh afternoon shadows, mist hanging over a field, weathered stone, an old shopfront, someone standing in a doorway – I can almost see the finished black-and-white photograph before I press the shutter. That certainty was something I never really had when I was constantly thinking about color.

Four years of shooting this way have made that instinct stronger. There is a consistency to my work now that I had struggled to find before, and that consistency is probably the closest thing I have ever had to what people call a photographic style. It is not about applying the same preset to every image or making everything look identical. It is about consistently being drawn towards the same kind of light, the same textures, the same subjects, and the same atmosphere.

And perhaps that is the biggest lesson monochrome has taught me. Style is not something you necessarily manufacture. Sometimes it appears when you remove the things that are getting in the way.

I spent a long time believing that developing a style meant finding a particular camera, lens, focal length, or editing preset. For me, it turned out to be much simpler. I just had to remove something. I stopped shooting in color more than four years ago, and I have not looked back. In doing so, I finally started seeing the photographs I had wanted to make all along.

See our guide to the best cameras for black-and-white photography

Every photographer has, at some point, wished that their gear could do something it simply can't. You suddenly crave a shutter speed fast enough to freeze a hummingbird's wing, or a trigger quick enough to catch a water droplet at the exact moment of impact.

It's nice to fantasize for a few seconds, then most of us just shrug and get on with what we're doing. Eadweard Muybridge (1830-1904) didn't.

In 1878, faced with a question no one could answer, he built his own equipment from scratch. And in doing so, he built his own photographic system for capturing rapid movement in a sequence of split-second exposures – which went on to inspire an entirely new technology and art form.

The question was simple: does a galloping horse ever have all four hooves off the ground at once? Nobody could actually see the answer, because a horse's legs move too quickly for the human eye to resolve. It had become a surprisingly contentious question.

Industrialist and racehorse owner Leland Stanford hired Muybridge – an England-born landscape photographer with no formal training in engineering – in 1872 to prove it.

He did so by building a tool that could actually answer the question, once and for all. He didn't wait for better technology to arrive. He made his own.

How it worked

Muybridge lined up 12 cameras along a racetrack in Palo Alto, California. Each was aimed at a whitewashed backdrop marked with measurement lines. He stretched fine threads across the track at chest height, each one wired to a shutter release.

As the horse ran, her body snapped the threads one by one, firing each camera at the precise instant she reached it. As a solution, the word "ingenious" springs to mind.

He knew no human reflex was fast enough to time the shots by hand, so he removed the human reaction time from the equation. The underlying idea feels remarkably familiar today: let the subject trigger the camera rather than relying on a human to press the shutter.

The only difference between his version and modern iterations was that the former was built from wood, thread and springs – not infrared sensors.

The other challenge was exposure time. In 1878, a typical exposure ran to several seconds. Muybridge needed something closer to 1/1000sec. So he built his own spring-driven shutter mechanism to get there, pushing his glass plates and chemistry to their limits.

To say this was a huge technological leap feels like understatement.

What the photos proved

When the plates came back, they answered the question definitively: a galloping horse does lift completely off the ground.

The airborne moment happens when the legs are gathered tightly underneath the body, mid-stride, a position nobody had ever realized despite watching horses run for thousands of years. What a tribute to the power of photography.

Muybridge could have stopped there. Instead, he built the zoopraxiscope, a spinning glass disk that flashed his sequence of images in quick succession, blending them into the illusion of a galloping horse projected on a wall. Thomas Edison saw the device in action and the rest is history.

(While cinema still needed flexible film and years more invention from others, Muybridge's homemade rig was clearly the start of things to come.)

The lesson for us today? I'd say it's this. The next time you're trying to get a shot and your equipment isn't up to it, don't think: 'Shall I upgrade?' Think: 'How can I work around this problem?' The lateral thinking that can lead to is not only fun, it might change the way you approach photography in the future.

And maybe, just maybe, it might change the world of photography itself.

Just over two weeks after the total solar eclipse of August 12, 2026, eclipse season will deliver a second act. On the night of August 27-28, a very deep partial lunar eclipse will see Earth's shadow cover more than 96% of the moon's visible surface. Although it falls just short of totality — and a so-called “blood moon” moment — the eclipse will be deep enough to turn much of the moon a reddish-orange color, creating a spectacle that will look similar to a total lunar eclipse.

For photographers, it will be one of the best opportunities to capture a lunar eclipse for some time. In fact, no deeper lunar eclipse will occur until the total lunar eclipse on New Year's Eve 2028 — and the next one visible in North America, Europe and the UK won’t be until June 25-26, 2029 — making this a rare chance to capture a dramatically darkened moon.

A lunar eclipse is a relaxing affair. Unlike a solar eclipse, a lunar eclipse requires no special filters, no elaborate safety precautions and no split-second timing. Lunar eclipses are completely safe to view with the naked eye. The event unfolds slowly over several hours, giving photographers plenty of time to experiment, refine their settings and enjoy the experience — though this one arguably comes with a little more jeopardy than others.

Understanding 2026’s partial lunar eclipse

Lunar eclipses can only occur during a full moon — in this case, August’s Sturgeon Moon — when Earth is between the sun and the moon. When the alignment is precise, the full moon passes through Earth’s umbra (the darkest center of its shadow), and sunlight is blocked from reaching the lunar surface; the only light that does reach it is refracted through Earth’s atmosphere. This is totality. As sunlight passes through Earth's atmosphere, shorter blue wavelengths are scattered while longer red wavelengths are bent into Earth's shadow. During a lunar eclipse, the filtered sunlight reaches the moon and drapes its surface in copper, orange and red. It’s the same physics that causes red sunsets and sunrises — but it’s a process that will stop short of being total on August 27-28.

At maximum eclipse, only a thin sliver of the moon will remain outside the umbra. Most of the lunar surface will be darkened and illuminated only by sunlight filtered through Earth's atmosphere. You’ll read that this event is a “blood moon,” but technically that term should be reserved for a total lunar eclipse. Since a small portion of the moon remains outside the umbra throughout the event, Aug. 27-28’s eclipse is officially a partial lunar eclipse, albeit an unusually deep event.

From a photographer's perspective, however, the distinction is mostly academic. Although the human eye may not see much color, to a camera, the moon will appear darkened and reddish, producing images that many observers would struggle to distinguish from those taken during a total lunar eclipse. The only clue will be a tiny sliver of sunlight on the limb of an otherwise dark, reddish moon.

Partial lunar eclipse: understanding the phases

A partial lunar eclipse has two short and one very long phase (times supplied are in Universal Time):

Penumbral lunar eclipse (01:23-02:33 UTC on Aug. 28): when the full moon begins to move through Earth’s penumbral shadow, its fuzzy outer shadow. As it does so, the full moon will dim considerably and lose its glare. It’s an excellent time to simply photograph a full moon.

Partial lunar eclipse (02:33-05:51, with max. eclipse at 04:12 UTC): when the full moon begins to move through Earth’s umbral shadow. The spectacle here is the edge of Earth’s shadow gradually moving across the lunar surface, leaving the covered portion darkened. As the event peaks (maximum), 96% of the lunar surface will be dark, and cameras will pick it up as reddish. The sequence then reverses as the moon moves out of the umbra and back into the penumbra.

Penumbral lunar eclipse (05:51-07:01): simply a repeat of the first phase, as the moon gradually regains its brightness.

Partial lunar eclipse: Europe vs. North America

The official line is that European observers are unlucky because this deep partial lunar eclipse will be lost to moonset in the west. For example, here are the times for London, according to TimeAndDate.com:

London

Penumbral begins: 2:23 a.m. BST on August 28

Partial begins: 3:33 a.m. BST

Maximum: 5:12 a.m. BST

Moonset 6:15 a.m. BST

In Europe, the maximum eclipse comes shortly before dawn, with the moon low in the western sky. That creates opportunities to photograph the darkened moon above city skylines, coastlines, mountains and landmarks while the eastern horizon begins to brighten. For landscape photographers, the combination of an eclipsed moon and dawn twilight may produce more memorable images than a close-up photograph taken through a long telephoto lens.

New York

In North America, the eclipse occurs much earlier, but it depends on where you are. For example, here are the times for New York, which is perfectly placed for a view of the entire eclipse high up in a dark sky, making it ideal for close-up lunar photography.

Penumbral begins: 9:23 p.m. EDT on August 27

Partial begins: 10:33 p.m. EDT

Maximum: 00:12 a.m. EDT on August 28

Partial ends: 01:51 a.m. EDT

Penumbral ends: 03:01 a.m. EDT

Los Angeles

On the West Coast, however, the initial penumbral phase occurs when the full moon is yet to rise, with the partial phase beginning shortly after moonrise. For example, here are the times for Los Angeles:

Penumbral begins: moon below horizon

Moonrise: 7:17 p.m. PDT on August 27

Partial begins: 7:33 p.m. PDT

Maximum: 9:12 p.m. PDT

Partial ends: 10:51 p.m. PDT

Penumbral ends: 00:01 a.m. PDT on August 28

Equipment for lunar eclipse photography

Lunar eclipses are one of the few astronomical events where any type of camera you have can be used:

Wide-angle camera lenses and smartphones: landscapes featuring the eclipsed moon.

70-200mm lens: closer-in on the eclipsed moon in a landscape.

150-600mm lens: detailed shots of the eclipsed moon.

Telescope: close-up shots of the eclipsed moon.

One of the attractions of lunar eclipses is that photographers can approach the event in many different ways. A smartphone is well-suited to capturing the atmosphere of the event, while a wide-angle lens on a mirrorless or DSLR camera will work well in Europe (as it sets in the west at dawn) and on the west coast of North America (as it rises in the east at dusk). Where the eclipse occurs close to a horizon, a foreground is possible. For these shots, a medium telephoto lens in the 70-200mm range should work well. For photographers on the East Coast of North America, the best option is close-ups, using at least a 400mm lens (the bigger, the better!) or a small telescope.

Whatever equipment you choose, a sturdy tripod is a must-have because, as the eclipse reaches its maximum and the moon darkens, you’ll need to use longer exposures.

Camera settings for the partial lunar eclipse

Photographing a lunar eclipse is mostly about adapting to the changing brightness of the lunar surface. For a regular full moon photo, manually focus on the moon using Live View on the camera’s LCD screen, zooming in on the limb of the moon. With that done, the starting manual settings are generally: 1/125 to 1/250 second exposures at ISO 100 and an aperture of around f/8. As the eclipse gets close to its peak, exposures might lengthen to as much as 1/8 second.

During a lunar eclipse, the moon becomes progressively dimmer as it moves through Earth’s shadow. By the time of maximum eclipse, it may be hundreds of times fainter than it was at the start of the night. The solution? Experiment. Expect to adjust settings continuously throughout the event, essentially lengthening shutter speeds as the eclipse develops, with longer exposures allowing the totally eclipsed areas of the lunar surface to look red and shorter ones allowing the partially eclipsed regions to look sharp. Consider combining separate exposures later.

One way to cover your bases is to use automatic exposure bracketing (AEB), which takes multiple exposures at different shutter speeds. The beauty of this tactic is that it helps you get around the problem of extreme dynamic range on the moon, where one portion is brightly lit, and the rest is darkened. Make a plan to combine them later using post-processing software.

Whatever settings you use, always capture in RAW, which will give you so much more data — and so many more options — when processing your images after the eclipse.

An event worth making the effort for

Although it falls just short of becoming a true “blood moon,” the August 27-28 partial lunar eclipse will bring photographers one of the finest lunar photography opportunities until the end of 2028. Whether you’re shooting close-ups from North America or an odd-looking moonset in Europe, Earth’s shadow will put on a memorable show. If the skies are clear, it will be worth making the effort.

Read more:

• Astrophotography tools: the best camera, lenses and gear

• The best lenses for astrophotography

• The best star tracker camera mounts

The Alpa Reflex 1 (commonly known as simply the Alpa Reflex) is one of the most fascinating early 35mm single-lens reflex (SLR) cameras.

Although it never achieved the production numbers of the Kine Exakta or later German and Japanese SLRs, it established Switzerland as a maker of precision photographic equipment. It became the foundation of the prestigious, if somewhat quirky, Alpa series of cameras.

The camera's story began in the late 1930s in Switzerland, the home of Pignons SA – best known for manufacturing watch components. It wanted to diversify into photographic equipment and had commissioned Kyiv-born engineer and inventor, Jacques Bogopolsky (1895-1962), to design a compact 35mm reflex camera.

Bogopolsky (who also worked under the names Jacques Bolsky, Jacques Boolsky and later Jacques Bolsey) was already well known as the designer of the famous Bolex H16 movie camera. His SLR design was completed by 1939, just as Europe entered World War II.

The first prototypes appeared between 1939 and 1942 and carried “experimental” names, such as Bolca, Teleflex and Viteflex. Most were made for testing and only a very small number were exported. By the end of the war, they had settled on the Alpa name – chosen because it evoked the image of Switzerland.

The Alpa Reflex was officially introduced at the Swiss Trade Fair in April 1944. It was a beautifully machined, exceptionally compact, hand-built camera. In 1944 some 115 cameras were made, while 1945 saw that almost quadruple to 434 cameras.

The Alpa Reflex combined two different focusing systems: the expected waist-level finder as well as a coupled optical rangefinder with its separate bright-line viewfinder. The coupled rangefinder was retained until the Alpa 6 came along in 1956. It included a split-image focusing aid, eliminating the need for a separate rangefinder.

Even then, the Alpa 7 (sold concurrently with the Alpa 6) continued to have the rangefinder for those who did not trust ground glass focusing – although your scribe knows of no other firms to attempt this arrangement. The Praktina and a few others had a direct viewfinder in addition to their reflex finders, but not with a coupled rangefinder.

The Alpa Reflex quickly earned a reputation for extraordinary craftsmanship. Production was intentionally small; Pignons preferred quality over quantity and even accepted special-order modifications from customers.

Unlike many manufacturers, Alpa did not manufacture its own optics, instead commissioning lenses from leading European makers including Kern & Co (the famous Kern-Switar series), Angénieux (France), Schneider (Germany) and others.

Most early cameras carried fast 50mm standard lenses of exceptionally high optical quality, often from Kern or Angénieux. Pignons even guaranteed the performance of the lenses it sold with its cameras!

These first-generation Alpa Reflex cameras were built in several production series, designated C (1944-45 – first commercial production, D (1945-47 – improved manufacturing techniques) and E (1947-51 – final version), though these letters were not marked on the cameras.

In 1949 Alpa introduced the Prisma Reflex, replacing the waist-level finder with a fixed pentaprism. It was only the third pentaprism-equipped 35mm SLR, following the Rectaflex and Contax S, though the eyepiece, rather oddly, is angled upward at 45°.

Only these first-generation Alpas had the rangefinder and, in all, around 5,000 first-generation cameras (including the Prisma Reflex variants) had been produced by 1952.

In 1952, Pignons completely redesigned the Alpa line with new die-cast construction and updated mechanics. These second-generation cameras retained the Alpa name but were substantially different internally, marking the end of the original Reflex I design.

In 1959, the then-current Alpa 6, 7 and 8 became the 6b, 7b and 8b models, gaining a rapid film advance lever and an instant-return mirror.

While most cameras of the era wound with a lever that swept back-to-front, the Alpa swept front-to-back – which many photographers initially found odd. Reviewers noted that, although unusual, it quickly became natural in use and enabled the film to be wound without removing the camera from the photographer’s eye.

One of the interesting quirks of Alpa is that the model numbers do not indicate the sequence in which they arrived. Instead, they denoted different specification levels offered at the same time.

The short-lived 4 series was an economy body with a waist-level finder. The 5 models offered a pentaprism and the 6 added a split-image focusing aid. The 7 series had a Leica M-style, coupled rangefinder in addition to the reflex finder, while the 8 models were pure SLRs with every bell and whistle they offered.

The later series of models (the 9, 10 and 11) were named in the order introduced and added metering, and then TTL metering.

Alpas were always a limited production affair, with its peak production being in 1965 when roughly 1,300 cameras were made. Between 1944 and 1990, production was about 45,000 Alpa cameras of all models – making every Alpa Reflex comparatively rare today.

That, however, is not the end of the story. After Pignons ceased camera production in 1990, the Alpa trademark lay dormant until 1996 when it was purchased by Ursula Capaul and Thomas Weber.

Their vision was not to revive the old 35mm SLR, but to build a Swiss-made, medium format camera of the finest possible precision for landscape, architecture, industrial and fine-art photographers: the Alpa 12 series.

They anticipated that digital imaging would eventually replace film, so they designed the system from the outset to accept interchangeable film backs and digital backs from various makers. Even today, you can mount the latest Hasselblad CFV 100C digital 100MP back!

Capaul and Weber sold the company in 2022, although they took great care to ensure that it remained an independent, Swiss manufacturer. Today, the firm is known as Alpa of Switzerland AG.

Read more of David Young's ongoing series on classic cameras, as well as his book A Brief History of Photography.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best rangefinder cameras you can buy today

Most people believe that the oldest surviving photo of a sitting US president is the portrait of President James K Polk (1795-1849), captured by photographer Matthew Brady (1822-1896) at the White House on February 14 1849, near the end of Polk's term.

But what if I told you that another image of the same president was taken three years earlier by a largely forgotten Welsh immigrant, John Plumbe Jr?

Plumbe (1809-1857), a Welsh-born US citizen, started professional life as a civil engineer before moving into photography. In 1840, he came across the work of an itinerant daguerreotypist in Washington, DC, inspiring him to learn the emerging craft.

By the following year, Plumbe had opened his first photography studio in Boston. Eventually, this grew into a massive enterprise of more than a dozen portrait and daguerreian galleries across major US cities, earning Plumbe the nickname "the American Daguerre”.

In 1846, Plumbe captured the image that has come to define his photographic legacy: a group photo of President James K Polk and his cabinet shortly after the declaration of war on Mexico. The frame, now recognized as the oldest surviving photograph of a sitting US president, is also the earliest photographic record of the White House interior.

Over the years, Plumbe has gained wider recognition for his history-defining image. But something many photographers still don't know is that he pioneered a commercial practice used by professional studios to this day.

Plumbe is thought to have been the first photographer to brand the daguerreotypes produced through his various studios with his own name, regardless of which photographer actually made them.

Several notable early photographers and daguerreotypists trained, worked or honed their skills in Plumbe's galleries. These included William Shew (1820-1903), Samuel Masury (1818-1874) and Plumbe's brother, Richard Plumbe, who managed the Dubuque, Iowa, gallery.

But by marking all images with the name "Plumbe”, the pioneering photographer ensured that the brand he created became more recognizable than the individual photographer.

Historians will remember the president, but Plumbe's 1846 image of James K Polk also captures the rise of photography as a commercial industry. Plumbe wasn't merely documenting a moment in history; he was building a photography brand years before anyone else.

You might also like…

Here's our expert pick of the best cameras for portraits. Don't worry, there are no daguerreotype cameras in this list. I've read about these selling at auction for nearly a million!

If you're in the market for a new high-end camera phone, three brands are likely to spring straight to mind: Apple, Google and Samsung. Thanks to their huge marketing might, they enjoy unrivalled brand recognition. It's therefore easy to assume that these industry titans must produce the best camera phones on the market - after all, how could a smaller brand possibly compete?

But the reality is that the competition isn't just catching up, or even equalling the camera phone giants - it's already overtaken them. Massive brand recognition can become an easy way to generate sales, reducing the need for genuine hardware innovation. We’ve seen exactly this from the last few generations of iPhone and Galaxy S Ultra phones, with the latter reusing camera sensors not just for one phone generation but three, and counting. Incremental upgrades are now the order of the day. This is currently somewhat understandable, as the skyrocketing cost of NAND flash is increasing the overall price of camera phones, thereby preventing manufacturers from making substantial camera hardware upgrades without raising unit costs still further. However, this alone doesn't excuse what is now multiple years of stagnating camera phone hardware from the major players.

So if the latest iPhone or Galaxy S Ultra isn't going to give you the most advanced camera experience available right now, what will? For that you need to turn to China. Not content with dominating almost every other area of consumer electronics, China also now gives us the most innovative and impressive camera phones on the market. The three brands at the top are Vivo, Xiaomi and Oppo. For the last few years all three have consistently produced more compelling flagship camera phones than anything from Apple, Samsung or Google. The Chinese contenders pack bigger image sensors, more optical zoom, and extra features that make recent iPhones and Galaxy S Ultra handsets look downright dull.

I've been lucky enough to long-term test Oppo's current flagship, the Find X9 Ultra, for the past three months. With a launch price of £1449, it can't rely on being substantially cheaper than its rivals, but it doesn't need to be. In its Tundra Umber colorway, it's immediately more distinctive than the comparatively bland Galaxy S26 Ultra, even to those not in 'the know'. And if you are a photographer that recognises the Hasselblad design cues, the Find X9 Ultra just looks better still.

Start shooting and the consistency of image quality from the four separate camera modules is immediately apparent. There's seamless focal length transitioning from 0.6x (ultrawide) through to the maximum 10x optical (230mm-equivalent) zoom. But the Find X9 Ultra’s zoom capability doesn't stop there. Through a combination of on-sensor cropping and clever AI zoom, up to 120x reach is possible, and with surprisingly competent image quality. Stick with the default photo mode and shots look immediately appealing, with strong vibrancy and contrast, as well as bags of fine detail. Dynamic range is high, but thankfully stops short of looking over-processed. If you'd rather have an even more natural image aesthetic, there's always Hasselblad Master mode. This has been tuned to emulate the more subtle image quality from Hasselblad's medium format cameras, and it opens up various manual controls. I’m also a fan of the X-Pan mode, which enables instant panorama recording and is a lot more convenient than using the much slower and fiddly sweep panorama mode.

All well and good, but most flagship phones have plenty of optical zoom, along with manual control and a plethora of shooting modes. Where the Find X9 Ultra really pulls ahead of its rivals is its ability to be teamed with Oppo’s Hasselblad Earth Explorer Kit. This contains a bespoke 300mm teleconverter lens, along with a special phone case to which the lens mounts, plus a tripod collar and other small accessories. You might assume this is all a bit gimmicky – after all, clip-on telephoto lenses can be plasticky garbage – but you’d be very wrong. With aesthetics and build quality that are truly befitting of the Hasselblad branding, this is so much more than just a publicity stunt: it turns what’s already a darned good camera phone into a genuinely usable option for capturing sports and wildlife. Check out our full review of the teleconverter lens for more details.

Oppo isn’t the only Chinese brand pushing camera phone boundaries. Vivo also offers a similar case+teleconverter kit for its flagship camera phone, the X300 Ultra, and though I’ve yet to test this, it looks just as impressive as Oppo’s implementation.

I fully admit that optional teleconverter lenses aren’t going to change the camera phone world: as effective as they are, they’ll always be a niche product. Rather, Oppo and Vivo’s camera cases and teleconverters serve as symbols of China’s desire to innovate and enhance the camera phone industry, while also highlighting the comparative lack of hardware development we've seen from the more established brands.

So when the time comes to choose your next phone, and you want something that’s been designed for enthusiast photographers, I implore you: don’t just default to the current iPhone/Pixel/Galaxy S: check out the competition from Oppo, Vivo and Xiaomi, as these are now the brands at the forefront of phone camera development.

The GoPro name is synonymous with the action camera, but the brand’s latest launch sits somewhere between action and cinema camera territory. The move, however, was a long time coming: GoPro says that the Mission 1 series is the biggest leap since the introduction of HyperSmooth.

I met with GoPro’s senior vice president of product management, Pablo Lema, after the launch of the Mission 1 and Mission 1 Pro and ahead of the launch of the company’s first mirrorless camera.

Lema, who has worked with the action camera brand since 2014, says that the series is the GoPro that fans have been asking for since the Hero7 Black in 2018.

“Mission 1 has been a long time coming for us,” Lema said. “I don't say this lightly when I say it to other folks: it was the most important camera we've launched since Hero7 Black. The step up in performance is real, and it's valued by the user reception of it. And we're gonna continue to build from there.”

The Hero7 Black introduced GoPro’s HyperSmooth, a stabilization algorithm that made a significant difference in capturing steady footage from the variety of mounting scenarios that GoPro is meant for.

HyperSmooth continues in the Mission 1 – and in fact, the combination of HyperSmooth with interchangeable lenses is one of the reasons that Lema is most excited for the company’s first mirrorless camera.

But, while DIYers have been hacking GoPros to use different lenses since the Hero4, what GoPro fans have been asking for for several years is a larger sensor. The Mission 1 series delivers that with an 8K-capable 1-inch sensor

GoPro users started getting particularly loud about demanding a larger sensor as competitors like DJI and Insta360 began introducing 1/1.3-inch and 1-inch sensors on competing action cameras.

“The Mission 1 series is probably the GoPro that everyone was asking us for since Hero7 Black,” Lema said. “Myself and the teams, we were pumped to be able to finally get it out to the world. And what's good is that it gave us insights and motivations as to what to build next, which we're already working on.”

While GoPro couldn’t share data on just how many Mission 1 and Mission 1 Pro cameras the company has sold so far, Lema said the series has been “the best reviewed and best-received camera we’ve had at a product level since Hero7 Black.”

But, with the move to a larger sensor comes an entirely new category. GoPro isn’t calling the Mission 1 and Mission 1 Pro an action camera, but refers to the series as a “compact cinema camera” instead.

“We saw that the types of creators that would extract the most out of a 1-inch type sensor with big dynamic range, massive fps, much better low light capabilities as a result of the imaging package were, what we considered to be, well, for lack of a better word, compact cinema creators,” Lema said.

“The high-creativity folks that are on Instagram and YouTube are the ones that we extract the most out of a package like this.”

While GoPro isn’t calling the Mission 1 an “action camera,” the company’s love for accessories remains with the new series. Lema said that the new point-and-shoot grip and wireless microphone – a GoPro first – have been particularly well received, along with bundles that pair the Mission 1 Pro with the Fluid Pro gimbal.

GoPro’s most-asked-for camera couldn’t have come at a better time. The launch of the Mission series comes as the action camera giant faces significant financial struggles.

The company’s latest financial reports indicate a 38% drop in camera sales. Stock market paperwork filings indicate that the company could “be required to significantly reduce, restructure, cease operations, or seek protection under the Federal bankruptcy laws” if the Mission 1 doesn’t help to turn its finances around.

The action camera company is also in the “later stages” of looking for a potential buyer or merger.

The GoPro Mission 1 and Mission 1 Pro have already begun shipping, but GoPro CEO Nicholas Woodman says the ILS will be arriving next month.

This is part of a four-part series with an exclusive interview on the GoPro Mission 1 series. Read part one on the Mission 1 Pro ILS here, or read what GoPro says about the Hero series in the Mission era here.

You may also like

Take a look at the best cinema cameras or the best GoPro cameras.

I have always been a bit of a lens snob. Not necessarily a red-ring, G Master absolutist, but I've always had a preference for first-party lenses.

Up until now, all my Canon cameras have had Canon glass and my Fujifilm cameras have Fujinon optics. My logic followed the consensus that first-party lenses offered the best autofocus, the cleanest compatibility and, supposedly, the fewest compromises.

However, recently I purchased a Panasonic Lumix S9 – and had the world of L-Mount lenses opened up to me. Panasonic makes its own fantastic glass, but there are 11 players currently in the L-mount Alliance including big hitters like Leica and Sigma – as well as rising stars like Viltrox.

I had played around with some super-cheap Viltrox lenses several years back, and optically I thought they were good but I wasn’t sold on the excessively “budget” feeling of the lenses.

However, I was recently sent the Viltrox AF 16mm f/1.8 to test for DCW – and honestly, this lens has shifted my opinion of the brand dramatically.

The AF 16mm f/1.8 is a full-frame autofocus ultra-wide prime available for L-Mount (as well as Sony E and Nikon Z mounts). Outside, it’s built with a solid metal barrel, aperture ring, customizable buttons, dust-resistant sealing and even a small color display showing focus information.

This certainly does not feel like a “budget” lens – despite costing far less than many first-party equivalents. More importantly, it does not shoot like a budget lens either.

It has a fast f/1.8 aperture and a 105.6° angle of view. Inside are 15 elements arranged in 12 groups, including 4 ED and 3 aspherical elements. It is impressively sharp in the center at f/1.8, performs strongly toward the edges when stopped down and controls distortion remarkably well for such a wide lens.

There are still some compromises. At 550g, the Viltrox is hardly featherweight and its autofocus is not quite as polished as the very best first-party motors. Wide-open vignetting is also noticeable.

Yet none of that feels as important when the lens costs around $580 / £530. Meanwhile, Panasonic’s narrower Lumix S 18mm f/1.8 costs $1,099 / £799 and, for Sony shooters, Sony’s own FE 16mm f/1.8 G is $899 / £849.

The bigger story is what this says about Chinese lens makers. Brands such as Viltrox are going from cheap curiosities to genuinely compelling alternatives.

I still understand the appeal of first-party glass, but I am no longer convinced that the logo on the barrel deserves quite such a large portion of my budget.

I’ve been stopped by security guards when photographing architecture in London so many times, I’ve always felt that very few people understand the basics of photography law in the UK.

And if a recent pamphlet released by the government is anything to go by, I feel vindicated, because it would seem that not even the Home Office can make it make sense.

The document in question, which can be found on Gov.uk, is aimed at asylum seekers and claims that you should not photograph or video somebody in a public space without their permission – going so far as to say you “could be arrested”.

Well, unless the UK government has rushed through new legislation that I don’t know about, this is a direct contradiction of UK law. I mean, can you imagine if Martin Parr was prevented from capturing his legendary The Last Resort?

You need look no further than the Metropolitan Police’s own advice on photography to find a paragraph that completely contradicts the government brochure:

“Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel.”

It’s common sense, really. Otherwise, taking a photo with a camera phone in a bustling city center would carry the risk of being arrested, right?

Now, that’s not to say anyone wielding a camera can act with impunity. Photographing somebody in public might be legal, but the way you photograph somebody in public rightfully matters.

If a photographer’s actions stray into unlawful activities such as harassment, or authorities have reason to suspect said photographer of unlawful activities, then the outcome can most certainly be very different.

It also matters what you intend to do with the images. Editorial and personal usage is one thing, but images intended for commercial use can differ.

And of course, UK law is rarely simple. There are still exceptions to the rule, so it’s always advisable to familiarize yourself with the latest legislation before you head out with your camera.

And to be fair, the pamphlet also covers activities that most certainly are unlawful. The law around private spaces is too nuanced to go into in detail here, but you can’t just walk onto private premises and expect to take photos.

And although it should go without saying, both capturing and sharing explicit imagery without a person’s permission is absolutely unlawful.

Negative effects on photography

I have two major problems with the aforementioned pamphlet. Firstly, it’s misleading. And secondly, it’s not uncommon for photographers to get harassed when out and about with their camera in public anyway.

We don’t need more people walking around ready to pounce on anyone who vaguely points a Fujifilm X100VI or Nikon D3500 in their direction.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not the sort of photographer who likes to push street photography boundaries. I won’t criticize Bruce Gilden’s work, but I’m no fan of his method. And if I ever took a photograph of somebody and they politely asked me to delete it, I would.

But when I’m out and about capturing travel, street and architecture photos, people inevitably stray into the frame. And that’s the whole point of street photography, right?

Documenting the human element. Using a tiny figure against a huge building to emphasize the sense of scale. Capturing a person with a bright red coat amongst a sea of suited morning commuters. Or capturing the very moment a person walks through a single band of light.

And what about personal surveillance? Dash cams and doorbell cameras capture public footage of people…

What really annoys me is that the pamphlet singles out photographers specifically. Because I can tell you now, phone photographers don’t get approached half as much as actual photographers.

And let’s face it, if you’re up to no good, you’re not going to be using a slick retro camera or a pro mirrorless body that screams, ‘Look at me, I’m a photographer.’ You’re going to be using the most inconspicuous everyday camera available to you – a phone! Or a pair of camera glasses (double ick, as far as I’m concerned).

So, to Andy Burnham, the Home Office and the UK government, please – either change this misleading pamphlet or change the law.

You might also like...

Are you into street photography? Check out the best cameras for street photography and the best compact cameras. Plus, here's how to get started in street photography.

There was a lot of discussion surrounding the Panasonic Lumix L10. But it's fair to say that the bulk of it was about, well, the bulk of it.

It was pretty unaninmous that the L10 is a fantastic compact camera – but it was also pretty unanimous that it was too big to be considered "compact".

Indeed, a lot of people lamented that it's bigger than the Lumix LX100 – a camera that Panasonic doesn't make any more. But just because Panasonic doesn't make it any more, doesn't mean you can't still buy it!

There were so many people saying, "I would buy this if it was smallerm" and "This would be the perfect compact camera if it was the size of the LX100".

Folks, the LX100 already exists! You can buy it right now!

It's always baffled me that camera reviewers – and tech reviewers in general – seem to forget about anything that isn't on the shelves right now. I understand that people want to read about what's new, but kit doesn't cease to exist just because it's not currently being manufactured.

The Lumix LX100 is a perfect case in point.

Right now, everyone is looking for a truly pocketable, powerful compact camera. Everyone wanted that luscious Leica 24-75mm f/1.7-2.8 lens in a smaller body. What they're looking for is the LX100 – or perhaps the Lumix LX100 II.

The Lumix LX100 packs a 16.84MP sensor while the LX100 II's is 21.77MP sensor, with both cameras offering the same multi-aspect ratio shooting experience as the L10 (for up to 12.7MP or 17MP resolution respectively).

The autofocus is Panasonic's more leisurely DFD system (Depth From Defocus, aka contrast detect), which isn't as snappy as the L10's Phase Hybrid AF, but for the sedate kind of everyday, travel and street shooting you'll be doing, it's absolutely fine.

When it comes to continuous shooting, the LX100 actually out-bursts the L10's 30fps by offering up to 40fps in Super High speed mode, though the caveat is that these are low-res 3MP files. Otherwise, both the LX100 and LX100 II match the L10's 11fps mechanical speed (but bursts with AF are limited to 5.5 and 6.5fps respectively).

Obviously there is a gaping chasm in video capability, with the L10 offering 5.6K 60p with all the bells and whistles, while its predecessors are capped at more basic 4K 30p – though pretty much everyone concedes that these are primarily stills cameras.

Still, the most important aspect of this conversation is the size: where the L10 lumbers in at 127.1 x 73.9 x 66.9mm and 508g, the L100 is a mere 114.8 x 66.2 x 55.0mm and 393g while the LX100 II is a bit more butch at 115.0 x 66.2 x 64.2 mm and 392g.

Those numbers may not look like much on paper but, as you can see, in practice they make all the difference. The L10 is the same size as the Lumix S9, a full frame mirrorless camera, while the LX100 (in particular) and the LX100 II are truly compact compact cameras.

The only issue, of course, is that these cameras aren't current… but again, they are still very much available! The LX100 you see here came from MPB, a used camera specialist that's a great equalizer when it comes to conversations like this.

When you buy from somewhere like MPB, you're not limited to what a company is trying to sell you right now – you can explore its entire back-catalog to find the camera you actually want. So, if you want a camera that's closer to the LX100 than the L10, I recommend you give it a look.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best compact cameras, which comprises everything from the best point-and-shoots to the best APS-C compacts to the best full-frame compacts.

I hear a lot of people talking about autofocus as if it’s some kind of cheat code: it’s taken the challenge away from photography – you can’t miss. And while I certainly think that AF algorithms have advanced tenfold in the era of the mirrorless camera, changing the game forever, it worries me that beginner or intermediate photographers might feel like they’re doing something wrong when they miss focus.

Let me tell you, I’m a photography educator with years of experience and I still miss focus regularly. Granted, how much you’re likely to miss depends on what you’re shooting. But it also depends on your standards for critical focus. I’m somebody who likes to know that I’ve absolutely nailed my focus and it really bugs me when I haven’t.

Other photographers have different standards – and that’s not to say they’re wrong. Something I’ve had to work on in recent years is my tendency to overemphasize the importance of critical focus and be a bit more lenient with my images. But what I’m interested to know is where does this myth that you can’t miss actually come from?

The ‘you can’t miss’ myth

Autofocus is so much more than camera tech. The lens, aperture, light, and subject all affect your hitrate. It’s one thing for a camera reviewer to test a body with a ‘nifty fifty’ at f/8 in broad daylight, and a whole other ballgame for a wildlife photographer shooting in drab weather at f/2.8 with a 200mm lens, trying to focus on a red squirrel that won’t keep still! Don’t get me wrong. I’ve been that camera reviewer and the time you get with a new release and the lens that comes with it means that the latter scenario is rarely an option. But you get my drift.

As someone who enjoys photographing both sports and wildlife, I can tell you that no current autofocus system is capable of hitting a darting critter’s eye or the helmet of a superbike rider consistently. These situations usually require long lenses, which complicate things further. You’re usually shooting at a fast aperture in order to gather more light so you can increase your shutter speed and compensate for camera shake.

All of this results in a much smaller depth of field, allowing far less margin for error if you don’t quite hit your intended point of focus. And since long lenses amplify camera shake, the setup is moving around a lot more, causing the camera to refocus more than usual. Add low light into the mix, and even advanced hybrid-autofocus systems will find the situation more challenging. So, not matter how good your autofocus system is, you absolutely can miss. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

You might also like...

Want more of my ramblings? Nikon never bothered to support the Nikon Zf and Zfc with retro-cool lenses, but thanks to Voigtlander it doesn’t need to. You can’t buy heritage: Why Nikon still rules as it celebrates its 109th birthday! Plus, “Overwhelming” demand forces Nikon to halt Z 600mm f/6.3 VR S orders (report).

When you think of the world’s largest camera manufacturers, your mind probably jumps straight to Canon, Sony or Nikon. Leica? Probably not.

Leica is the luxury option; the beautifully engineered German camera brand that makes expensive rangefinders, exquisite M lenses and cameras assembled with an almost obsessive attention to detail. But I recently started counting Leica’s current cameras and something rather surprising happened: I got to 16!

Yes, Leica currently makes 16 distinct camera models. Look at the M-System alone and you have the Leica M11, M11-P, M11-D, M11 Monochrom and the new Leica M EV1 on the digital side. And it still manufactures the M6, MP and completely mechanical Leica M-A for film photographers.

That's eight cameras before we have even left the M-System.

Then there is the SL mirrorless system. Leica currently offers the SL3, SL3-S, and recently introduced Leica SL3-P, giving photographers and filmmakers three distinctly different full-frame professional bodies.

The SL3 concentrates on high-resolution 60MP photography, the SL3-S takes a faster 24MP hybrid approach, while the SL3-P sits between them with a 44MP sensor and some seriously impressive photo and video credentials. Suddenly we are at 11 cameras.

And we are nowhere near finished. The Q family now consists of the Leica Q3 with its 28mm Summilux, the Q3 43 with its more natural 43mm perspective, and the Q3 Monochrom, which takes the same fundamental idea and builds it around a dedicated 60MP black-and-white sensor.

Add the Leica D-Lux 8, a premium compact camera, and the Leica Sofort 2, a luxury hybrid instant camera, and there it is: 16 cameras currently sitting within Leica’s portfolio.

What makes that number even more remarkable to me is that 14 of those 16 cameras are arguably aimed squarely at serious photographers, advanced enthusiasts or working professionals.

I would probably exclude the Sofort 2 and, depending on how strict you want to be, the D-Lux 8 from that description. Everything else is a serious photographic tool.

Leica is not inflating its range with dozens of inexpensive beginner bodies separated by tiny specification changes; it has film rangefinders, digital rangefinders, an EVF-equipped M, dedicated monochrome cameras, professional mirrorless hybrids and some of the most capable fixed-lens full-frame cameras money can buy.

So, does that secretly make Leica the largest camera manufacturer of them all? Literally, no. I am not suggesting for one moment that Leica produces more cameras by volume than Canon, Sony or Nikon, nor that it has suddenly overtaken the Japanese giants in market share.

But judged by the sheer number of serious current camera bodies available from what we continue to think of as a small, specialist luxury manufacturer, Leica suddenly looks enormous. Sixteen cameras is not a boutique selection any more. That is a proper ecosystem.

I think our perception of Leica simply has not caught up with what the company has become. We still talk about Leica as though it essentially makes “the M”, with perhaps a Q sitting alongside it.

Yet today you can buy a completely mechanical film camera with no battery, a metered film rangefinder, a 60MP digital rangefinder, a screenless digital M, an M with an electronic viewfinder, a dedicated monochrome body, a 30fps full-frame mirrorless camera, an 8K-capable professional hybrid or a fixed-lens full-frame compact.

Few manufacturers cover such wildly different interpretations of photography while retaining such a clear identity across all of them.

There is also something rather refreshing about the way Leica has done it. Rather than trying to build one camera that supposedly suits everybody, Leica seems increasingly happy to make highly specific cameras for highly specific photographers.

Want color? There is an M for that. Want black-and-white? There is an M for that, too. Hate rear screens? Leica has you covered. Want an EVF but still want M lenses? That now exists. Want autofocus and interchangeable lenses? Buy an SL. Want the whole experience condensed into one body and one lens? Buy a Q. Want film? Leica will still sell you a brand-new mechanical camera in 2026.

That is why I think Leica might be the camera giant hiding in plain sight. Not the largest by sales, production numbers or market share, but perhaps one of the largest when it comes to the breadth of genuinely serious photographic choices coming from a single premium brand.

For a company whose reputation is built around exclusivity, simplicity and doing things the old-fashioned way, Leica has somehow ended up producing 16 distinct and diverse cameras at the same time. And the strangest thing is that almost nobody seems to have noticed.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Leica cameras, along with the best Leica M lenses for rangefinders and the best Leica SL lenses for mirrorless.

Since its inception in 1958, NASA has arguably played the most important role in furthering our knowledge of Earth, the universe and natural phenomena.

Through its mesmerizing photos captured by spacecraft imaging devices and pioneering astronauts with handheld cameras, the agency has compiled the premier portfolio of pictures that have helped us, as visual creatures, understand our place in the cosmos.

This World Photography Day, take a look at some of the most iconic of these images, delving into why they helped shape our perception of our very existence.

Man on the Moon (1969)

Just 11 years after its founding, NASA achieved what many would say was its biggest triumph: putting a man on the Moon. On July 20 1969, Neil Armstrong set foot on the lunar surface, immortalizing the moment with his famous words about taking what was a small step, but a “giant leap for mankind".

And while the very act of a human setting foot on a celestial body that wasn’t Earth lit the fires of possibility that we could, one day, venture further into space, it was the images captured during these moments that truly opened our eyes to the realities of this ambition.

When Neil Armstrong took the shot of Buzz Aldrin meandering across the crater-ridden surface using a modified 70mm Hasselblad 500EL camera, he not only captured the glory of Apollo 11, but a frightening realization of how hostile the universe truly is.

The vast pitch-blackness of deep space behind Aldrin was a stark reminder that, despite the triumphant Moon landing, any journey to more distant destinations would be fraught with peril, regardless of how advanced our technology may ever become.

Blue Marble (1972)

By 1972 NASA was sending its sixth crewed mission, Apollo 17, to the lunar surface. Roughly five hours into the journey of astronauts Eugene A Cernan (commander), Harrison H Schmitt (lunar module pilot) and Ronald E Evans (command module pilot), someone clicked the shutter.

While NASA has always credited the Blue Marble shot to all three crew members, over the years Schmitt has maintained that he was the man behind the camera, using it to document weather patterns.

Whether or not Schmitt did, in fact, capture the frame, the image certainly served the purpose for which he claims it was taken. At a distance of some 18,300 miles from Earth, it clearly displayed Africa, the oceans and the Antarctic ice cap, in what was the first time an Apollo trajectory made it possible to photograph the south polar ice cap.

The image served as one of the early fully-illuminated color views of global cloud systems and continental interactions, helping to inspire holistic, planetary-scale climate models rather than localized weather forecasting.

Pale Blue Dot (1990)

While Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin proved to us the dangers of space, the Voyager 1 spacecraft imaged its vastness. In 1990, 23 years after launching, and at an unfathomable distance of 3.7 billion miles from home, the vessel pointed its narrow-angle camera toward the inner Solar System.

At the request of the famous physicist Carl Sagan, who wanted one final photograph of our home world from afar before the onboard imaging system powered down forever, mission control – which initially worried that directly facing the Sun could destroy the camera optics – agreed.

In the frame, Earth appears as nothing more than a speck of light, much like a distant star appears to us from the planet. But the message of the image carried much greater weight than its composition. The scene redefined our perspective of the Solar System, putting before our eyes the absolute vastness of space surrounding our grain of sand in the universe.

Since then, Voyager 1 has continued its journey at a speed of roughly 37,800 miles per hour, becoming the first human-made object to cross the heliosphere and enter interstellar space, now at a distance of nearly 16 billion miles away.

Pillars of Creation (1995/2014)

A little closer to home, and in more recent history, the Hubble Space Telescope captured arguably NASA’s most iconic image: the Pillars of Creation. The famous 1995 frame depicts a trio of giant columns of cool hydrogen gas and dust in the Eagle Nebula, some 6,500 to 7,000 light-years from Earth.

These stellar nurseries are composed of dense pockets of gas collapsing under gravity, which ignites nuclear fusion and births new stars. While NASA already had a rigorous understanding of these processes by 1995, the image visualized, in mesmerizing color and clarity, how the cosmic bodies responsible for generating light are born.

Just shy of two decades later, NASA’s newer telescope, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), re-imaged the Pillars of Creation in even higher definition. JWST’s infrared instruments were able to peer through opaque dust that blocked Hubble’s vision, more accurately revealing newly formed stars.

Hubble Extreme Deep Field (2012)

NASA has also used space telescopes to observe newly formed galaxies and, in 2012, looked further back in time than ever before, capturing the Extreme Deep Field (XDF) image with Hubble.

The space agency pointed the telescope at a tiny section of the cosmos within the constellation Fornax, shooting more than 2,000 separate exposures over a period of 10 years.

The final composite image, which comprised roughly 23 days of total exposure time, revealed around 5,500 galaxies, capturing ancient light that traveled over 13 billion years to reach us.

Through Hubble XDF, we got to witness early galaxy assembly taking place when the universe was less than 5% of its current age, shortly after the Big Bang. The composite scene opened a window onto cosmic evolution, helping scientists better trace the timeline of celestial structures like our own Milky Way.

The future of our existential understading

Later this month, NASA will launch Nancy Grace Roman (NGRST), the latest of its space telescopes. Scientists will use its wide-area panoramic surveys as a scout, efficiently finding interesting patches of the universe to feed to Hubble and JWST’s deeper, narrower-field focus for detailed follow-up surveys.

The NGRST represents the next step in NASA’s mission to continue shaping our knowledge of the universe and our understanding of what it is to exist in this mind-boggling expanse. And, by the next World Photography Day, I’m sure the agency will be sharing new iconic images, adding to this ongoing visual lesson.

You might also like…

Here's our expert astrophotographer, Jamie Carter's, pick of the best cameras for astrophotography.

Skylum is making it very clear that the photographer comes first. That’s right, the company that helped pioneer AI-powered photo editing software, when it launched Luminar Neo (now Luminar) back in 2022, is reaffirming its stance on the relationship between creativity and artificial intelligence.

In a press release for the program’s latest update, Skylum’s CEO, Ivan Kutanin, addressed “growing concerns around tech affecting human talent,” and claimed that Luminar is taking a different approach, “one where technology helps photographers realize their creative potential, rather than overshadow it.”

This might seem a bit rich coming from a program packed with AI-powered tools, but it feels to me like a statement of intent. A promise, if you will, that Skylum will continue to develop its AI attributes, but not at the expense of the creative.

And indeed, Luminar’s current feature set is very much about enhancing existing photographs as opposed to generating an image out of nowhere.

You need look no further than the controversy surrounding EvotoAI at the beginning of the year to understand why Skylum might want to make its stance clear.

When an AI Headshot Generator briefly appeared on Evoto’s website, it received huge backlash from its user base. For a company that had marketed itself on putting professional photographers first, many felt that the move overstepped the mark.

Evoto apologized and explained that the release was a mistake, but the damage had already been done.

Removing friction, retaining authorship

I got to talk to Skylum’s CEO Ivan Kutanin regarding the shift in the company’s tone, where he was keen to point out that very little has changed: “It has never been about asking AI to replace creativity,” he said. “It is about using AI to remove the friction that stands between a person and their creative intent.”

My understanding of this is that Skylum’s goal is to help the photographer get where they want to go as quickly and as easily as possible, without taking away their creative autonomy.

As Ivan puts it: “Technology should expand photographers’ capabilities without taking authorship away from them,” adding that “the photographer should remain the decision-maker”.

As to why the company is so intent on making this clear now, the CEO explained: “As AI is becoming more powerful, this distinction becomes even more important.”

And Skylum has gathered the data to back this up, with internal research finding that “control, authenticity, and personal style are top priorities among photographers.” So much so that these attributes are more important than both speed and automation.

“What they need is AI assistance that understands the image, reduces repetitive work, suggests possibilities and makes difficult techniques more accessible.” Skylum’s goal, then, is to provide AI tools that integrate “seamlessly” into Luminar’s workflow.

“We want the technology to disappear into the workflow and simply help photographers’ creative minds do their magic,” said Ivan.

He used the software’s Atmosphere and Enhance tools as examples. The latter intelligently applies a wide range of tonal adjustments including shadows, contrast, and saturation, in one fell swoop. However, it’s still controlled via a traditional slider.

“AI is not about 'press a button and let AI create.' It is a much deeper collaboration between human creativity and machine intelligence,” he said.

Still an AI photo editing pioneer

I couldn’t help but wonder if all this meant that Skylum’s priorities regarding AI had changed, but Ivan assured me it hasn’t.

“Using technology to expand photographers’ creativity rather than replace it has always been part of our values,” he said. “With this release, no actual change is coming – we are simply underlining what’s been here all along.”

And for existing Luminar fans, that means continuing to strive for improvement but not at the expense of the company’s AI mantra.

Ivan told me that the team is working on tech that’s “more advanced than ever,” but building a clever feature isn’t enough. It must be something that “genuinely helps photographers express their creative vision.”

Luminar update

The latest update will be released in two phases, with the first phase having already been released on August 05. The second phase is set to launch this fall.

As it stands, you can expect enhancements to the user interface and genAI tools. Export speeds that are up to 25% faster. Masking that uses 33% less RAM. Preset previews that load four times faster. And support for the following new cameras: Panasonic Lumix L10, Sony A7 V and Sony A7R VI.

The fall phase is set to feature a more precise and intelligent Crop tool. Atmosphere – Fog, which is said to give users “a more natural way to shape the mood of their photographs.” Improvements to both AI Assistant and Enhance AI. As well as the introduction of a new Web Editor, boosting its cross-platform workflow via browser support.

Skylum isn’t the only photo editing company affirming its stance on AI. This week, Digital Camera World interviewed Capture One CEO Rafael Orta who said: “We think of ourselves as a photography company… we never had any disposition to reinvent ourselves as an AI company.”

You might also like...

Check out the best photo organizing software and the best MacBooks for photo editing. For industry updates, keep checking the latest camera news.

Back in 2019, I got my hands on a Nikon D3500; my first “proper” camera. It was an unexpected 24th birthday gift from my parents, which was around the time I was truly getting into photography and had clearly started to talk to my family about it with some conviction.

Admittedly, it took me the best part of a year to pluck up the courage to turn the dial from auto to manual mode after I finally demystified the exposure triangle with a 15-minute YouTube video.

But at that point, I unlocked the true power of the Nikon D3500 – and what a beginner camera it was. In fact, eight years after its release, I still recommend this camera to photographers starting out.

The main beginner draw to the Nikon D3500 is that it's insanely practical. As a newbie, you don’t want to be faffing with complicated settings and changing batteries all the time. The simplicity of the camera encourages you to shoot, rather than frustrating you.

First off, it’s got a really simple LCD interface that’s intuitive and limited. In the two years that I shot with this camera, I can’t remember a time when I struggled to find a setting or understand what was happening on screen.

It may sound pedantic, but the last thing a beginner needs is a menu packed with pages and pages that will only put them off exploring what their camera can do.

Next up is the battery life, and this is a huge benefit of the Nikon D3500. I kid you not, on a full charge this 14.5oz / 415g beast can snap upwards of 1,500 images. That is absolutely unheard of by today’s mirrorless standards, with entry-level rigs lucky to capture 500 images before their battery runs dry.

As a beginner, you want to shoot. That's it; take pictures and repeat. This is how you build a love for photography. Having to buy several replacement batteries and swap them out after just a few hours can impact this negatively.

Mirrorless cameras do, of course, have their advantages for beginners. I’ve previously argued that they can actually help more on the creativity side of things thanks to all the built-in help. But, in my view, for beginners, practicality trumps creativity.

And while the Nikon D3500 might only feature 5fps bursts, FullHD video and a maximum ISO of 12,800, it’s cheap (roughly $450 / £330 / AU$630) can go for days before dying and is just a joy to use.

So, if you’re thinking about what your first camera is going to be – or, like my parents, you're going to gift someone as theirs – I’d seriously consider the Nikon D3500. While I think practicality is the main selling point, it has other great traits – which you can read about in our Nikon D3500 review, where my colleague Rod called it "an evergreen classic".

You might also like…

Already got one? Make sure you're using one of the best lenses for the Nikon D3500! And here’s our roundup of the best cameras for beginners as well as our pick of the best cheap cameras.

On August 10, the main headline in Oregon was the sad story of a 20-year-old man who fell to his death while taking a picture at a 177-foot-tall waterfall.

Zachary Nicholas Mertens, of Burlington, Kentucky, climbed over a barrier at the top of South Falls’ upper viewpoint at Silver Falls State Park. He then, according to state police, crossed the creek directly above the falls to pose for a photo before tragedy struck.

Now, I must say that the authorities assume that Mertens took the risk for photos, as the Oregon Police bulletins and local news coverage mention nothing about any images being recovered, nor a smartphone or camera.

However, the upsetting report comes amid concerns of Gen Z outdoor explorers getting into increasing trouble while trying to capture Instagrammable content.

And if this was the case with Mertens, then I imagine he was after some gnarly selfies looking down into the torrenting falls, for which he paid the ultimate price.

But even if the assumptions are correct, and even if Mertens had come away with the snaps successfully, I don’t think they would’ve been anything special at all.

I haven’t been to South Falls, but I’ve now looked at enough photos, and also taken enough photos of waterfalls, to know that from atop, the perspective just doesn’t do these landmarks justice.

Maybe Mertens’ pictures would’ve been good. Perhaps they would’ve given us a tight, uneasy feeling in our stomachs.

And after all, renowned photo historian and photographer in his own right, Peter Adams, famously said: “Great photography is about depth of feeling, not depth of field.” Although so many things would’ve had to have gone right for Mertens.

From ensuring he didn’t fill the background with the falling water and not the pool at the base, to getting enough of himself in the frame, the images would’ve been tricky at best.

If only Mertens had looked at pictures of South Falls beforehand, or perhaps taken a second to appreciate how fantastic the falls look amid the surrounding nature, he might’ve realized that the better, and non-life-risking, option would’ve been to shoot it from afar.

I don’t get the impression that Mertens was a photographer by any stretch. There’s no way he would’ve decided to capture the falls from atop if he was.

But even with only a smartphone at his disposal, judging by some of the pictures I’ve included in this article, there’s no doubt he would’ve come away with some great snaps of South Falls if taken from afar.

Now, not all landscape shots are better composed from distance. As someone who does a lot of outdoor photography, some of my favorite images are close-ups of hikers on trails or of the finer details, like leaves juxtaposed against tall trees in the background.

But when getting close is extremely risky, like it was for Mertens, it’s time to reassess your idea for the composition by looking at the scene from a few steps farther back. The likelihood is you’ll find a decent, if not better, frame to take.

You might also like…

Here’s our expert roundup of the best cameras for landscape photography.

When it comes to the production, supply and sale of third-party optics that will fit a slew of different manufacturers’ mounts, lens specialist Tamron says it is number one for global sales – claiming as recently as last month that it holds as much as 60% market share.

No wonder, then, that Sony is eyeing up Tamron for a possible takeover bid – the intention and the approach, if not yet the actuality, currently being confirmed by both parties. As it is already in possession of a 15% stake in the company, the electronics giant’s plan is that it will make the lens specialist a wholly owned subsidiary.

Yes, Tamron currently lists 23 lenses directly compatible with the Sony mount at the time of writing. But it also produces plenty of other directly compatible lenses for Canon, Fujifilm and Nikon users.

If Sony were to acquire Tamron – which has currently set up its own committee to consider the bid – I can imagine Sony taking a similar approach to when it exclusively snapped up Konica Minolta’s imaging expertise in 2006.

Konica Minolta immediately exited the camera business, while Sony was able to quickly introduce its first ever Alpha-branded DSLR, based on existing Minolta tech.

So, my worry for the wider photographic community is that Tamron itself may cease to exist – with its lenses hereon marketed as Sony lenses, with the same mix of decent build quality, performance yet affordability that the optical specialist offers now.

If that scenario plays out, I can’t imagine Sony continuing to do what Tamron currently does in offering lenses to other, non-Sony users. Plus I also wonder how it will impact its current relationship with Nikon, for whom it makes several Nikkor-branded OEM lenses.

Factor in a camera market that is experiencing a slowdown this year anyway, according to official figures from CIPA Japan, and the prospect gets even more intriguing.

Cutting out other camera owners might lessen the value of Tamron as a standalone brand. But if it’s subsumed by Sony, then that becomes academic anyway.

At present it’s not a done deal, just one under serious consideration that Sony certainly has the industry clout to pull off. It all comes down to whether Tamron, which independently has its own ambitious growth targets despite the uncertain economic climate, gives the green light.

If the market for interchangeable lens cameras really is in decline, and the current slowdown persists, I feel Tamron may well be tempted to take Sony’s money and run. However bad that is for competitive pricing going forward – and potentially the wider photographic community.

Ultimately, there will be winners as well as losers if a deal is done.

But to end on a positive note, among the winners will not just be Sony’s existing user base, who may theoretically get a boosted and continuing supply of affordable optics, but also rival third-party lens manufacturers such as Sigma, Laowa, Viltrox and more, who will have one less competitor out there.

You might also like...

Take a look at the best Sony lenses from all manufacturers.

Back in 1902, Hugo Schrader started Plaubel & Company in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Schrader had done his apprenticeship at Voigtländer and later worked for one of the more innovative German camera makers; Dr Rudolf Krügener. In fact, he married Dr Krügener’s daughter, Ruth.

You may wonder why a chap named Schrader would call his firm by a different name. The answer is as simple as it is odd. The Plaubel name comes from Karl Plaubel, Hugo Schrader’s brother-in-law. Apparently, Schrader chose it because he thought it was easier to remember than “Schrader”.

The Plaubel camera company became one of Germany's most respected photographic manufacturers, known for high-quality press cameras, large-format cameras, and later the famous Makina medium-format rangefinders. The firm's history spans more than a century.

Plaubel started by manufacturing lenses (including the Anticomar, Heli-Orthar and Supracomar lines) and selling other firms' cameras to augment its income – though these cameras would nearly always go out the door with a Plaubel lens or two.

Around 1909-1910, Plaubel began producing its own cameras – and in 1912 it introduced the camera that would define its reputation: the Plaubel Makina. The Makina was a compact folding press camera with scissor-strut bellows construction. Over the following decades it evolved into one of Europe's best professional cameras for the press.

During the Second World War, the factory was heavily damaged by Allied bombers. But the firm recovered, resumed making cameras and introduced its Peco line of monorail view cameras – which became highly regarded among studio and architectural photographers for their precision engineering and exceptional build quality.

Curiously, it also made the VeriWide 100 – an ultra-wide-angle medium format camera. The Veriwide 100 was designed around a fixed 47mm f/8 Schneider Super-Angulon lens, giving an angle of view of nearly 100°.

It made seven 6x10cm negatives on a roll of 120 film, with an angle of view roughly equivalent to an 18–20 mm lens on a 35mm camera but with the image quality advantage of 120 Roll film.

It was introduced in 1959 in collaboration with the New York photographic distributor, Burleigh Brooks, Inc. Production ran until 1965 and, depending on who you believe, between 2,000 and 5,000 were made.

In 1975 Hugo Schrader’s son, Goetz Schrader, sold Plaubel to the Japanese Kimio Doi Group. Although the company retained the Plaubel name and the German factory, camera development largely shifted to Japan.

The most famous result of this new ownership was the new Plaubel Makina 67, introduced in 1978. Unlike the original German Makina cameras, it was a sophisticated 6x7 cm folding rangefinder camera equipped with a superb Nikkor 80mm f/2.8 lens and built-in metering.

The metering was a TTL (through-the-lens) match-needle system, which used a semi-transparent mirror just behind the shutter to divert a small amount of the light to a silicon photodiode. The photographer would change the shutter speed or aperture until the meter indicated correct exposure.

Because the Kimio Doi Group did not own a factory, the cameras were made under contract. Early development prototypes (called the Makinette 67) were produced in the German factory, but the production Makina 67 was all Japanese.

Konica’s chief designer, Yasuo Uchida, led the design team with assistance from Professor Udo M Geissler of the industrial design department of the Technical University of Munich.

It seems that Uchida did his best to persuade Doi to use a Konica lens for the camera. However, Doi had already paid Nikon for the development of the 80mm f/2.8 lens specially for the Makina 67. Uchida then asked for a copy of the lens for testing, and legend has it that he was blown away by the results.

In late 1981, the Makina W67 arrived. It was essentially the same camera, but with a wide-angle 55mm f/4.5 Nikkor lens. It was followed in 1984 by the Makina 670, which was a modified Makina 67 that could use either 120 or 220 film.

There was also a Makina 69W Proshift that had a 47mm Schneider Super-Angulon and made eight 6x9cm exposures per roll of 120 film. The lens was mounted on a sliding flange, which allowed for perspective control in the same manner as shifting the front standard of a view camera.

Early production was done by Konica or Copal (there is a lot of uncertainty about this). But it seems certain that in 1981 production shifted to Mamiya, where it remained until production ended for all models in 1986 due to rising costs.

In all, some 24,500 cameras were made across all four models, though the standard “67” accounted for 17,000 of them. Plaubel continued to make its famous monorail cameras in Germany until finally closing its doors in 2017.

Among film photographers, the Makina 67 remains one of the most sought-after medium format cameras. Today, a Plaubel Makina 67 in good working condition sells for considerably more than it did when new – even after adjusting for inflation.

Read more of David Young's ongoing series on classic cameras, as well as his book A Brief History of Photography.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best medium format cameras you can buy today.

Even as an adult, American Emily Rhyne would barely go past her knees into the ocean without having a “ton of anxiety”. But then, in 2021, something clicked.

During a trip to Egypt, the former New York Times videojournalist was inspired by divers at the Red Sea. “I didn't have a dive certification and it kind of got in my ear then that [it] would be something cool to do, like a cool adventure,” she said.

Finally, in 2025, Emily conquered her fears by gaining a diving certification and she was immediately hooked.

By the time Emily was immersing herself in the world of diving, Canadian Nadia Aly, a Canon Explorer of Light and self-professed “water baby”, had already racked up countless hours with a camera in the ocean.

A longtime dive tour operator, she’d spent years capturing footage of some of the biggest ocean dwellers, like sperm whales and orcas.

But what Nadia and Emily will both tell you is that learning to use a camera underwater is just one half of the battle. Scuba diving opens up an alien world full of mesmerizing creatures but, to capture footage of them, you need to be a strong diver first and foremost.

Learn to dive before using a complex camera underwater

Emily’s diving journey began at Cozumel, a small Caribbean island off the southern coast of Mexico, where she eventually racked up her first 100 dives. Throughout all of these, Emily shot on a trusty GoPro Hero13.

“I can't imagine doing it another way,” she said. I always say to people […] when you're 100 feet underwater it's not the time you want to be messing with your [camera] settings.”

ABOVE: One of Emily's early GoPro videos from Cozumel

Although the GoPro wasn’t the filmmaking powerhouse setup she’d been used to while at the NY Times, her focus was on mastering basic dive technique – and the simplicity of the action camera was just the trick when concentrating on buoyancy, safety or rough conditions.

“You want all these things to be second nature. I cannot emphasize enough that I'm still learning like every single dive,” she said. Diving the same reefs day in, day out at Cozumel also meant that Emily began to learn how specific species of marine life behaved.

Learn to read the animal, not chase it

Dive number 70 and Emily came face to face with an eagle ray. The spotted, giant-winged predator was throwing up sand as it foraged the ocean floor for food, but was comfortable with the videojournalist's presence.

Emily gradually came closer until she was “right there” next to the ray, managing to record an intimate sequence before another group of divers scared it away.

In Nadia’s eyes: “You really have to learn how to read animals and approach them. You have to gain their trust.” According to the experienced underwater filmmaker, getting the “amazing shot” isn't only a lens decision, it’s a behavior decision.

“You have to get close to this animal in the water that's swimming, that's faster than you, that's larger than you,” she said. “You can’t charge at them”.

Knowing the place is just as important

After Cozumel, Emily crossed the world setting up base on Komodo, a paradisiacal Indonesian island and diving hotspot. Here she performed some 200 dives, all at the same resort, resisting the temptation to constantly move between destinations, giving herself “time to sink into a place”.

During her last week on the island, Emily shot her Postcards From Komodo video. The impressive footage was the perfect example of how the best underwater shoots don’t come from ticking off as many dive locations as possible.

Instead, they happened once you have a feel for the textures of a place, like how the morning light hits a dive map, things Emily said “take time to notice”.

ABOVE: Watch Postcards From Komodo

Start with a basic, not overwhelming camera

Roughly 100 dives in and Emily went “full throttle”. By this stage the GoPro 13, which had been the perfect starter camera, was beginning to hold her back. So she got her hands on a Canon EOS C50, a Nauticam NA-C50 underwater camera housing and a trio of professional lenses, including the RF 24-50 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM.

Emily now had some serious underwater filmmaking firepower, but the tradeoff was in equipment size and weight – especially when diving in strong currents, which is something she says beginners should avoid.

Unlike Emily, Nadia threw herself in at the deep end. Back in 2010, she came stumbling out of a Monterey, California dive shop with “10 boxes” of equipment in her arms, including a Canon EOS 1-D.

“I look at the guy (store attendant), I'm like, I don't know how – how is this supposed to like… how does the strobe, how does the camera go in?” she recalled.

However, splashing out on high-end gear right away was a tougher learning curve. And Nadia was about to find out the following week while diving at Bonaire, a small Dutch island off the north coast of Venezuela.

“I went to Bonaire and I started taking photos underwater and every photo was black,” she said. “[But] I kept at it [and] I would say by day four I started getting some good exposures.”

Master your gear before the big encounter

Nadia turned her initial Bonaire failures into her biggest lesson. Over each of the next five years, she spent roughly three-hundred days diving while mastering techniques like strobe positioning, understanding her camera settings and choosing the right lens.

“For every trip I went on, I always asked questions, always learned from other people,” she said.

Through trial and error, Nadia now knows that her Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM is ideal for extremely close whale encounters, while wider or zoom options, such as her RF 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM, come in handy when photographing sperm whales and orcas farther away.

In 2017, after years of mastering dive technique and her equipment, the big moment came.

While scouting for dive locations in La Ventana, off the northwest coast of Mexico, Nadia came across a feeding frenzy of mobula rays. “There were 20,000 plus of these mobula rays, I'm not joking. It's not an exaggeration,” she said.

She snapped a still of the swirling “vortex”, which, three years later, went on to win the prestigious Ocean Photographer of the Year 2020.

Be prepared for everything to go wrong

According to Nadia, at some point, things will go wrong with your gear. “As an underwater photographer, the biggest thing for preparation is redundancy,” she said. “You have to have double of almost everything.”

The dive tour leader always works with duplicate lenses, dome ports, batteries, O-rings and even a second setup. She either dives with her Canon EOS R5 Mark II or R6 Mark III, leaving one rig aboard just in case – like when her underwater housing flooded in La Ventana.

“You hold your camera upside-down so the water fills the dome port and you abort your dive and you go to the surface,” explained Nadia. “You hope that you didn't ruin your setup because that's an expensive leak.”

“Everything that you can think of that could go wrong, you need to just be ready for.”

The best camera is the one you don't have to think about

While Emily and Nadia might have taken different paths to becoming underwater filmmakers, for both of these oceanic creators, this is a craft of two disciplines.

You need enough camera skill that the equipment doesn't distract you from what’s happening in front of the lens. And at the same time, you need to be able to navigate the underwater world while using a camera almost instinctively.

You might also like…

We've got an entire section dedicated to underwater photography where you'll find tips, tricks and tutorials. And here's our pick of the best waterproof cameras along with the best underwater housings for cameras and phones.

At what point does something move so far away from the original source that it exists in name only?

Or, to put it another way, when all original components, meaning and context have been replaced – rather like a legacy rock act still performing, yet with none of its founding members – is it reasonable to still refer to it in the same way?

Those third-party manufacturers who have licensed the Kodak name to slap on brand new "Kodak cameras" with a rather baffling degree of success of late, would obviously say yes. But in my eyes, they’re not Kodak products.

The name is one thing, but what they’re selling is another, trading on the goodwill once afforded the brand when it was wholly Eastman Kodak.

And it held much kudos. A quarter of a century ago I was thrilled to be invited to Kodak’s UK HQ. I can’t remember which camera or instant printer was being launched at the time, but what I do remember is our driver claiming that he used to regularly drive for Elvis Presley.

Just like the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll bestrode popular culture in the 20th century, the original Kodak was the biggest brand in photography.

But, as I say, its best years were already more than a quarter of a century ago. And, like anything in life, as memory of the original fades, then surely the tie we have with it breaks.

I was moved to ponder the above by the news that Cewe is in the process of acquiring the Kodak Moments retail print business, most identifiable via its digital kiosks, from Kodak Alaris – itself a Kodak licensee, since Eastman Kodak filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January 2012.

It got me thinking that if the deal goes through, it will be yet another degree of separation from the source.

Cewe is presently suggesting that it plans to keep Kodak Moments’ 60,000-strong global photo kiosk network branded as such, rather than automatically assimilating that worldwide footprint into the Cewe family.

It’s yet another instance of a brand that once outwardly meant something becoming a zombie brand. Outwardly alive, inwardly dead. See also the recent reappearance of Minolta-branded compact cameras.

Add in Sony currently seeking to take over lens specialist Tamron, and it appears we’re entering a period of mergers, acquisitions and consolation for the photo industry, in which once powerful and unassailable brands are unassailable no more.

I’d view this as an inevitable result of a market that is contracting – in that reduced demand can no longer support a broad number of competitors.

But for those of us who spent the past 20+ years watching these businesses grow and reporting on them, it feels like a bit of a shame. As well as reminding us of the fact that nothing lasts forever – and, ultimately, our own mortality too.

Just like Elvis, it feels like Kodak – as it originally was – has now left the building.

It’s been a busy week for Nikon camera rumors, with updates regarding a proposed Nikon Z70 and a stills-focused iteration inspired by the Nikon ZR. But Nikon Rumors has published grim reading for anyone hopeful that Nikon’s 2026 will finally burst out of the starting gates any time soon.

The outlet has reported that multiple unnamed sources are warning of delays for “almost everything,” with some releases apparently being pushed into next year.

Now, I love a good camera rumor as much as the next person and actively enjoy getting excited about what’s in the pipeline. But I can’t stress enough that rumors like this should be taken with a grain of salt until the manufacturer releases a statement.

Not a Nikon-only problem

It’s easy to hear about news like this and wonder what’s going on in Nikon land, especially following the Big N’s recently revealed financial results.

However, let’s not forget that camera and lens releases have been sparse across the whole industry so far this year. And there are a multitude of possible contributing factors.

Tariffs, component shortages and memory prices have all driven up consumer tech prices. And with many countries experiencing an increase in the cost of living, not to mention the possibility of tech saturation, consumer reticence has meant camera sales are down.

Nikon Z9 II bottleneck?

It’s also worth noting that Nikon could be in a bit of a transition period, assuming that the much-talked-about Nikon Z9 II is on the horizon.

A second-generation flagship is a huge milestone and, if it follows the same trajectory as the Nikon Z9, it will lock in the overarching technology for future Nikon camera releases for years to come.

With that in mind, it’s possible that a release like the Z9 II could act as a bottleneck, because anything Nikon releases prior to a new flagship camera’s launch will surely be running on current-generation tech.

This is fine for potential releases like a Nikon Zfc II or Nikon Z30 II because, assuming they follow the same blueprint as their predecessors, they would borrow tech from the existing Nikon Z50 II.

But anything more advanced, like the rumored Nikon Z70 (assuming it’s a flagship APS-C mirrorless), would likely include next-gen tech. If that’s the case, surely the Nikon Z9 II would need to be released first or adjacent to.

Look no further than Nikon’s last flagship APS-C camera for evidence. The Nikon D500 launched alongside the full-frame flagship Nikon D5, famously borrowing some of its pro-grade sibling’s tech.

Ultimately, rumors will always circulate, but we’re never quite sure what’s happening behind Nikon’s closed door until there’s an official line. But one thing’s for sure: it’s a challenging environment out there for everyone. There’s no need to panic.

You might also like...

Check out the best Nikon cameras and the best Nikon Z lenses. Plus, “You’re protecting equipment worth thousands of dollars – and more importantly, your eyesight.” Total solar eclipse photographer explains what it takes to capture one of the world’s greatest phenomena.

“Hurry, quick!” snapped William 'Bill' Anders, Apollo 8 lunar module pilot, as the spacecraft window he was looking out of rotated away from Earth. Just moments before, the planet had come into view, majestically rising above the barren, crater-ridden lunar landscape.

The Apollo 8 crew, which also included commander Frank Borman and command module pilot Jim Lovell, was completing their fourth orbit of the celestial body, but had yet to see the now-famous Earthrise.

However, on this rotation, everything, from the module’s orientation to the crew members’ positions, had aligned perfectly. “Oh my God, look at that picture over there!” Anders had gasped. “There’s the Earth comin’ up. Wow, is that pretty!”

Having just captured the first Earthrise photo with black-and-white film using a Hasselblad 500 EL and Zeiss Sonnar f/5.6 250mm lens, Anders wanted to immortalize the never-before-seen perspective of the planet in color, but he only had around a minute.

“Hand me that roll of color, quick, would you?” he sharply asked Jim Lovell. “Where?” replied Lovell, who had no idea where to look, and the Earth was quickly moving out of the frame of Anders’ lunar module window. “Just grab me a color, a color exterior,” Anders tensely reaffirmed.

“Yeah, I’m lookin’ for one,” Lovell shot back. Then, seconds later: “Here”, as he passed Anders the film while calling “C368”, its NASA inventory code.

But the moment had gone. Lovell’s valiant effort to dig out the color film had taken too long, and Anders’ majestic view of the planet had been replaced by the endless black expanse of space. “Well, I think we missed it,” he sighed.

Then, after what seemed like an eternity of anticlimactic silence, Lovell ecstatically claimed: “Bill, I got it right here,” as, by chance, the Earth reappeared in another of the lunar module’s windows. “Bill, I got it framed, it’s very clear right here,” he almost shouted in excitement.

“Take several, take several of ’em,” Lovell commanded as Anders quickly moved into position, who had to tell his colleague to “calm down” in the process. But Lovell knew the moment was again passing: “250 at f/11,” he said, before blurting: “Now vary the exposure a little bit.”

ABOVE: NASA recreated the iconic "Earthrise" moment in real time, thanks to the Apollo 8 onboard recordings and cameras

Two clicks of the shutter later and Anders had captured the iconic Earthrise frame. Everyone on Earth would now get to see this unbelievable perspective of the planet that, otherwise, only these three astronauts would ever have seen.

Now, I’m not saying you need to plan every single shoot to a tee. After all, the Earthrise image turned out fine. Well, more than fine, as it went on to become one of the most reproduced and recognizable photos of all time.

But if there’s one thing we can take away from this incredible, funny and history-making story, it’s that, as a photographer, it pays to be prepared. And, depending on your shoot, that could even mean having an extra roll of film (or memory card, for digital photographers) within arm’s reach.

You might also like…

Here’s our expert pick of the best cameras for astrophotography. And here’s an interesting story about Jim Ross, NASA’s official aviation photographer who rides in fighter jets with a Nikon Z9 in hand!

There are few cameras I would be more nervous about attacking with a spanner than a Leica M, but apparently there is now a tool for that – or, more accurately, an entire kit of them.

Currently eBay is packed with inexpensive aftermarket repair tools designed to help owners dismantle and service classic Leica cameras at home, raising an interesting question:

With the cost and waiting time associated with professional servicing, is it finally worth learning how to perform your own CLA?

CLA, for those unfamiliar with the term, stands for clean, lubricate and adjust, and it is something that mechanical Leica cameras can benefit from as they get older.

The interesting part is just how accessible the specialist tools have become. Current eBay listings include 6- and 9-piece wrench and clamp sets advertised for Leica M2, M3, M4, M5, M6, M7 and MP bodies, with prices starting at just over $20.

I found one 9-piece kit on eBay UK for around £21, while another aluminum-alloy set was listed at £27.57. In the US, similar kits currently range from around $23 to $42 depending on the set and seller.

These aren't simply generic screwdrivers, either. The kits contain specialist-sized tools intended to remove components such as flash-socket rings, film-advance parts, viewfinder and rangefinder fittings, rewind controls and other circular fittings without resorting to the sort of pliers-based brutality that makes Leica collectors shudder.

Some sets are also advertised for screw-mount Leica cameras, while there are individual specialist tools available for more particular jobs. In other words, obtaining the equipment required to start taking apart a classic Leica has never been less difficult or expensive.

And that is where things become tempting. A mechanical Leica was built to be maintained – and these cameras have already demonstrated that, with the correct servicing, they can remain usable for many decades.

If you are mechanically minded, understand how a rangefinder works and are comfortable working with tiny precision components, spending $20-$50 on a set of tools could open the door to maintaining your own camera rather than shipping it away every time something becomes stiff, dirty or slightly out of adjustment.

With the price of virtually everything increasing, there is certainly a financial argument for learning the skill.

There is also the time factor. Sending a Leica away means packaging up a camera that might be worth thousands, waiting for it to be assessed, and then waiting again for the work to be completed.

Leica itself maintains a worldwide repair network staffed by factory-trained technicians, and says its service is intended to maintain the quality, precision, longevity and value of its products.

That expertise is precisely what you are paying for – but having the ability to carry out straightforward maintenance yourself could be enormously appealing to experienced DIY users who don't want their camera out of action whenever it needs attention.

Personally, my DIY abilities are enough to make the decision extremely easy: I would happily pay somebody who knows what they are doing. Give me a $25 Leica repair kit, and there is a very good chance that my innocent attempt at a CLA would rapidly become a much more expensive professional repair.

Removing the correct part is only the beginning. Knowing what to lubricate, how much lubricant to use, what should be left alone, how to correctly tension and adjust mechanisms, and how to calibrate a rangefinder afterwards is where the real skill lies.

Owning a Leica wrench does not suddenly make you a Leica technician in much the same way that owning a scalpel doesn't make you a surgeon.

There is also something else to consider: these cameras have value far beyond simply being photographic tools. A Leica M3, M2 or M6 can be an extremely valuable piece of equipment, and one slip of a tool can damage a screw, mark a top plate or turn a relatively simple service into a search for replacement parts.

When Leica talks about professional servicing preserving the quality and intrinsic value of its products, that point shouldn't be ignored.

However, I don't think these inexpensive tools should be dismissed – quite the opposite.

For photographers who already repair cameras, watches or other precision mechanical equipment, or those prepared to properly learn the process on something considerably less valuable before touching their prized Leica, they potentially open up an entirely new side to camera ownership.

There is something rather satisfying about the idea of not only shooting a 50- or 60-year-old mechanical camera, but also possessing the skills needed to keep it running for another generation.

So should you service your Leica at home? For most owners, I still think the answer is no. A proper professional CLA remains the safest and, in my opinion, best option for a valuable Leica.

But the fact that the specialist tools required to tackle these jobs can now be bought for the price of a couple of rolls of film certainly opens the door a little wider for those far more DIY-savvy than me.

With servicing costs rising and photographers increasingly reluctant to be separated from their cameras for extended periods, I can understand exactly why people are tempted. Just remember: the cheap part is buying the tools. Knowing how to use them is where the real investment begins.

You might also like…

Whether or not you're using one of the best Leica cameras, learning how to clean a camera sensor is one of the easiest and most money-saving do-it-yourself tips.

Parts of North America and Europe were wowed by the standout astrophotography event of the year, yesterday evening: a total solar eclipse. Switzerland-based Nikon photographer Angel Fux (@angelfux) traveled to Spain to capture the phenomenon in the optimal location, following over two years of preparation. She had just 103 seconds to capture the moment, all while operating two Nikon cameras and following strict safety precautions.

I was lucky enough to chat to the landscape and astrophotographer – who is known for hiking out to secluded mountainous locations – just days before the event. Angel had promised to deliver a stunning photograph of the total eclipse for publication, and as you read on to find out just how much planning was involved, you’ll realize that the gorgeous images that populate this article were never in doubt.

How Angel Fux prepared for the 2026 total solar eclipse

Digital Camera World: It took you over two years to prepare for this shoot. How did you go about researching the location?

Angel Fux: “When I first learned that a total solar eclipse would cross Europe in August 2026, I immediately felt there was an opportunity to create something very different from my usual astrophotography work. I knew I wanted to approach it as an artistic project rather than simply documenting the event.

“Like most of my projects, the research started on Google Earth. I spent countless hours virtually exploring landscapes along the path of totality, looking for locations that resonated with the kind of scenery I’m naturally drawn to. Mountains have always been where I feel most inspired, so I was searching for landscapes that carried some of that feeling while still preserving the identity of northern Spain.

“Along the way, it was recommended that I look into a particular area, and a viewpoint immediately stood out. It required a bit of scrambling to reach the summit, but the panorama was exactly what I had hoped for.

My decision to choose Spain was mainly driven by weather. Greenland and Iceland were incredibly tempting, but for an event that lasts only a few precious minutes, I wanted to maximize my chances of clear skies.”

DCW: You even rehearsed the shoot beforehand: How on Earth does that work?

AF: “It sounds funny at first – how do you rehearse an eclipse when you don't actually have one? The reality is that you're not rehearsing the eclipse itself; you're rehearsing everything around it. Over the past few months, I've repeated my entire shooting sequence many times. The goal is to make every movement almost instinctive by the time totality arrives. That means practicing camera settings, timing, switching between cameras, checking focus, and following a precise sequence under time pressure.

“The only step I obviously don't perform is removing the solar filter, because the sun isn't eclipsed during practice. Everything else can be rehearsed exactly as it will happen on eclipse day.

“Practice sessions are also invaluable for testing exposure settings. I compared different apertures, shutter speeds and ISO combinations, then carefully reviewed every frame afterwards to determine what works best for my equipment. By the time the eclipse happened, I wanted as many decisions as possible to have already been made.”

DCW: What split-second decisions could you be forced to make when the Moon passes in front of the Sun?

AF: “Ideally, none.

“The entire reason for months of preparation is to reduce the number of decisions that have to be made during those precious minutes. Every step is carefully planned beforehand. If something does require a last-second adjustment, it’s most likely weather-related. Even thin clouds passing in front of the sun can change the exposure enough to require small adjustments.

“Another important consideration is focus. Because this eclipse happens very close to sunset, atmospheric turbulence becomes more significant as the sun approaches the horizon. I therefore plan one final focus check just before totality begins to ensure everything remains perfectly sharp. The less you have to think during totality, the more you can actually experience it.”

DCW: You’re shooting with two cameras; does this double the decision-making process in the moment?

AF: “Not necessarily. The two camera setups have been designed to complement each other rather than compete for my attention. One camera is dedicated to a close-up view of the eclipse, while the other captures a much wider perspective.

“Because those two shots have different technical requirements, I’ve deliberately planned the sequence so I don’t have to perform critical actions on both cameras at exactly the same moment. It certainly adds more steps to the workflow, but they’re sequential rather than simultaneous.”

DCW: How and why did you select the Nikon Z8, Nikon Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S and Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S?

AF: “The Nikon Z8 has become a camera I know and trust completely. I’ve been working with Nikon equipment for over fifteen years, and the Z8 has accompanied me through some very demanding environments – from freezing alpine nights to high-altitude expeditions. Reliability becomes incredibly important when you only get one chance.

“The Nikon Z 400mm f/4.5 VR S was chosen because I wanted something between 300mm and 500mm that offered an excellent balance between reach, image quality and portability. For this project, it felt like the perfect focal length. The Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S lens, on the other hand, is probably the lens that best represents my photography.

“Most of my landscapes and night sky images are made somewhere within that focal range. It allows me to place the eclipse within its wider environment while capturing the dramatic changes happening across the sky during totality.”

DCW: Are budget solar filters effective or are quality alternatives worth investing in?

AF: “For me, certified solar filters are absolutely worth investing in. Beyond protecting both your eyesight and your equipment, a well-designed filter can also make your workflow significantly smoother.

“For example, I’m using a magnetic filter system that allows me to remove and replace the filter very quickly during the narrow window around totality. When you’re working with seconds rather than minutes, that kind of practical advantage

becomes very valuable. Ultimately, you’re protecting equipment worth thousands of dollars – and more importantly, your eyesight. That’s not an area where I’d personally choose to compromise.”

DCW: Has working with mirrorless tech made checking your exposure and focus much easier?

AF: “Yes, although I usually start by letting autofocus acquire the sun first before switching immediately to manual focus for the remainder of the sequence. Modern mirrorless cameras make that entire process much easier.

“Being able to magnify the live view, use focus peaking and check exposure in real time gives you a level of confidence that simply wasn’t available years ago. The autofocus systems themselves have also become remarkably reliable, so acquiring initial focus is incredibly straightforward before making those final manual refinements.”

DCW: What’s your top tip for beginner photographers looking to get into astro or solar photography?

AF: “I’d actually separate astrophotography and solar photography because they’re very different disciplines.

“For astrophotography, my advice is simple: start with the equipment you already own. That’s exactly how I began, with a fairly basic wide-angle lens and a tripod. The most important thing is simply getting outside and experimenting. Every night teaches you something new, and little by little you’ll understand what additional equipment would genuinely benefit your photography.

“Solar photography is quite different. Personally, I find it becomes much more exciting with longer focal lengths, but it’s also a field where safety has to come first. Before thinking about the photograph itself, learn how to properly protect both your eyes and your equipment using certified solar filters. Once that’s in place, experimenting with longer focal lengths opens up a fascinating world of detail that most people never get to see.”

DCW: Can you tell me a little bit about the short film you’re making with Nikon?

AF: “The film isn’t intended to explain how to photograph an eclipse – it aims to capture what it feels like to prepare for one. One thing I heard over and over while listening to experienced eclipse chasers or people who have experienced one, is that a total solar eclipse is almost impossible to describe. Everyone says the same thing: You simply have to experience it for yourself. That became the starting point for the film.

“Rather than making a technical documentary, we’re creating something much more cinematic and emotional. The story follows the anticipation, the preparation, the uncertainty, and ultimately that overwhelming sense of awe that comes from witnessing one of nature’s rarest spectacles.

“Alongside the film, I’ll also be unveiling the final artwork created for this project, which forms one of the central creative threads throughout the story. The film is being co-directed and produced together with filmmaker Prince Berkoh, whom I’ve known for several years. From the beginning, I felt he was the perfect creative partner for this project. He immediately understood the emotional direction we wanted to take, and collaborating with him has been instrumental in bringing this vision to life. Together, our goal isn’t simply to show an eclipse, but to inspire people to experience one for themselves.”

You might also like...

Looking for a step-by-step guide to photographing a future solar eclipse? Here's how to photograph a total solar eclipse. If you're looking for other subjects to photograph in the sky, here's our guide to Astrophotography in August 2026. Plus, here are the best cameras for astrophotography.

From the compact camera trend to disposable film cameras, much of the recent fads in the photography industry have been driven by younger generations such as Gen Z. But while Fujifilm sees a clear Gen Z influence on the rise in disposable film, instant film has a more diverse range of ages driving the analog trend.

I recently chatted with Ashley Reeder Morgan, the vice president of marketing and consumer products for Fujifilm North America, about the rise in popularity for disposable cameras and the QuickSnap line. But inevitably, it’s hard to talk about Fujifilm's disposable film cameras without acknowledging another highly popular lineup: Instax.

Morgan said that Fujifilm’s research suggests that the resurgence of analog photography isn’t just a short-term fad. While disposable film tends to lean heavily towards Gen Z, Morgan says that Instax has a more diverse range of users, though it is still a favorite among younger generations.

“When it comes to Instax, our consumers have actually evolved over time,” Morgan said. “At the beginning, the Instax user base skewed quite young, say ages 13-17, but as our product portfolio has diversified, so have our users.

"At our core, we are still a youthful, culture-forward brand and we are still beloved by younger generations, but some new models in our lineup also speak to other generations, either for themselves or as gifts for others.”

While Fujifilm's disposable cameras and instant film cameras are driven by different trends, Morgan says the underlying cause behind the analog resurgence is the same.

“For Gen Z digital natives that grew up with the ubiquity of smartphone photography and social media, using analog and instant film adds an opportunity to stay ‘present in the moment’ versus significant screen time being spent reviewing, posting, editing, and tracking likes and comments,” Morgan said.

While both disposables and instant film are inherently analog, Instax caters to a film experience without the cost (or wait) of sending film to a lab.

Some of Fujifilm’s Instax models are digital hybrid instant cameras that, instead of using traditional optics to expose a piece of instant film to the light, capture a digital image and spit out Instax prints using a built-in printer.

That enables options like the Instax Mini Evo and Wide Evo to skip printing the photos that didn’t turn out – and keep shooting even if the film runs out.

Morgan says that Fujifilm doesn’t see the QuickSnap and Instax lines crossing over. “While both of course appeal to analog fans, we don’t see QuickSnap or Instax competing with each other.

"We think of it as a continuum of gratification; smartphone photography is immediate but digital (utility), Instax prints develop in 90 seconds, right in front of your eyes and create an instax print you can hold (and with that iconic white border!), whereas QuickSnap images might be in-camera days, week, months or even years, until the consumer decides to develop and see them again and re-live that moment.”

You may also like

Take a look at the best instant film cameras, or the best Fujifilm cameras.

At the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar, Joel Marklund captured one of the most circulated images of the competition.

In the first part of my interview with the Nikon Ambassador and Chief Photographer at sports photography agency Bildbyrån, he told me, “How much is remembered from the final? It’s very rare that there’s one game-defining moment that everyone talks about.”

Last month’s World Cup final at the MetLife Stadium, New Jersey, did little to contradict that statement. But four years ago, things were a little different.

Joel managed to capture a World Cup photograph that would go down in soccer history, mirroring those famous images of Diego Maradona hoisting the trophy aloft, raised on the shoulders of his peers in 1986.

An iconic image of an icon

In 2022, it was Lionel Messi’s turn to triumph on the world stage. A moment many had long considered to be the only outstanding achievement in an otherwise unrivalled career, and Joel anticipated what was going to happen to a tee.

“What I did after the trophy lift was I moved behind the goal, where most Argentina fans were, and I was standing there for a long time.” He watched in vain as other photographers photographed ‘Leo’ celebrating at the other end of the pitch.

“I saw Messi with his family and thought: I’m missing all these shots! But I stayed put because I knew that if something would happen, it would probably happen here.”

Joel’s patience paid off. The ‘Little Magician’ made his way across the pitch to court the Argentine fans. “It was over in a few seconds. You had 100 photographers behind me that tried to get into the spot and they couldn’t because it was just too late. Anticipating is a big thing in sports photography.”

Finding the most newsworthy image

Even a sports photographer who’s covered 10 Olympics can’t be right 100% of the time. Despite preparing for the most newsworthy outcome to the 2026 competition, Messi’s Argentina couldn’t repeat their triumph in the desert.

Joel’s response was to focus on the next notable moment: the lifting of the trophy.

“What’s mostly remembered, from a historical perspective, is the hoisting of the trophy,” he explained. “It sounds like a very simple thing, but it’s really hard to get into that spot to get a good angle.”

With minutes still to go and Spain presiding over a narrow 1-0 lead, Joel made the critical decision to abandon his post. “I actually moved down to get a good position for the trophy lift before the final whistle. So I missed a few shots at the very end.”

It was the right call. Not only would Argentina fail to equalize and force the game into extra time, but the trophy ceremony would prove to be one of the most talked-about moments of the final.

During a scene that evoked memories of Chelsea’s Club World Cup triumph the year prior, US President Donald Trump once again remained on the podium to congratulate the winning team during their initial celebration, and once again it was a moment that Joel anticipated.

He knew that both the US President and FIFA President, Gianni Infantino, would be handing out medals and the FIFA World Cup Trophy itself. But Joel didn’t just arrive early to get a good spot; he was meticulous about which side of the podium he set up, too.

“I was actually on the right side, because I was thinking that if he [President Trump] will be in the picture, he’ll probably be on the right side again as during the Club World Cup, so I was intentionally there.”

The resulting photograph was a clear, unobstructed view of Spain’s captain, Rodri, lifting the trophy aloft, teammates celebrating around him, confetti fired into the air, and both presidents smiling and applauding alongside.

A pro sport photographer's Nikon gear

Joel is a Nikon Ambassador and longtime Nikon photographer, so it’s not surprising that his camera bag is bristling with the best Nikon cameras and the best Nikon Z lenses.

The flagship Nikon Z9 is what he uses for his three primary cameras, while he also sets up a couple of remote Z9 cameras behind the goals. His main on-pitch optics include the Nikon Z 70‑200mm f/2.8 VR S and Nikon Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S. He also sometimes uses the Nikon Z 600mm f/4 TC VR S.

But I was most intrigued to find out his thoughts regarding the upcoming Nikon Z 120-300mm f/2.8 TC VR S, especially as he regularly shoots with the 400mm f/2.8. He explained how it “fills a gap” for indoor sports such as ice hockey, but also tennis.

When it comes to soccer, though, the photographer’s distance from the pitch comes into play with Joel rating the 120-300mm zoom range as suited to Premier League stadiums.

“You are actually very, very close to the pitch compared to other European leagues, and you can be positioned very close to the goal as well.”

And if you do need an extra push, the lens is set to feature a built-in 1.4x teleconverter, delivering a 120-420mm zoom range. And while there’s no official release date for the Nikon Z 120-300mm f/2.8 TC VR S as of yet, Nikon has officially announced that the lens is in development.

As soon as more information is revealed, Digital Camera World will be reporting on it.

You might also like...

Would you like to get started in sports photography? Here's how to photograph soccer like a pro. If you're looking for the right gear, take a look at the best cameras for sports photography. Plus, these photos of the very first FIFA World Cup Final are surprisingly good, considering they were taken on 100-year-old cameras.

The Leica M240 was launched back in 2012 and, looking at it through the lens of 2026, I think it is remarkable just how far ahead of its time this camera really was. It arrived as Leica’s new-generation full-frame digital rangefinder, built around a 24MP CMOS sensor that, at the time, felt seriously impressive.

Today, when 40MP, 60MP and even 100MP cameras are increasingly commonplace, 24MP might not sound particularly exciting, but I would argue that it remains more than enough for the vast majority of photography. For social media, online publishing, editorial work and even decent-sized prints, those 24MP files still have plenty of resolution to work with.

But the specification that fascinates me most today is one that many photographers probably dismissed back in 2012: FullHD (1080p) video. Video on a Leica M seemed almost unnecessary at the time – and there were certainly plenty of Leica purists who wondered why it was there at all.

Fast-forward to 2026, however, and we live in the age of the content creator, where photographers increasingly want one camera that can shoot great stills while also grabbing a few clips of B-roll for Instagram, YouTube, TikTok or other platforms.

Suddenly, Leica putting video into the M240 doesn’t seem quite so pointless. In fact, I think Leica was way ahead of the curve – and I should know, because I own an M240 myself, and it has become the camera I use every single day.

There is another Leica M240 feature that I think deserves far more attention: the ability to change the rangefinder framelines from the traditional white to a much more prominent red. It might sound like a tiny thing on a specification sheet but, having actually used it, I think it is brilliant.

Those vibrant red framelines stand out against practically anything I point the camera toward, making it incredibly easy to see my framing quickly and decisively.

It has genuinely changed the way I compose with an M camera, particularly when working quickly, and it is one of those seemingly small features that you only fully appreciate once you have lived with it. I wish Leica had kept the option on its later M cameras.

Then there is the baseplate. Leica has always had its own ideas about how photographers should access storage and batteries, but the M240 had a wonderfully simple trick hidden underneath: the rubber SD card cover could be removed from the baseplate, enabling you to swap cards without taking off the entire plate.

Again it sounds insignificant until you are actually shooting, but it makes changing cards considerably quicker. On current Leica M cameras you no longer remove a traditional baseplate, but accessing the SD card still means removing the battery first. In some respects, the older M240 actually feels more convenient.

Yes, modern cameras increasingly offer USB-C transfer, and you can connect a cable and offload images without physically removing the SD card at all. That is undoubtedly useful in the right circumstances but, when I am actively shooting, I would much rather pull out a full card, slot in a fresh one and carry on.

Connecting cables, transferring files and managing storage while out working feels far more cumbersome than a straightforward card swap. Sometimes progress is not necessarily about adding more technology; occasionally, the simplest solution was already sitting there more than a decade ago.

That is why I genuinely believe the Leica M240 remains a fantastic camera in 2026. It might be 14 years old, and there are obviously newer Leica M bodies with higher-resolution sensors, better screens and more modern connectivity, but the fundamental photographic experience remains remarkably relevant.

You still get that unmistakable Leica M shooting experience, excellent 24MP files, video when you need it and even a few clever touches that later cameras abandoned. Better still, used examples can now be found for a fraction of what a new Leica M costs.

For anyone who has always wanted to experience a digital Leica rangefinder without paying modern Leica money, the M240 might not simply be an old Leica worth considering — it could actually be one of the smartest Leica buys you can make today.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Leica cameras – including the best rangefinder cameras – you can buy today, along with the best Leica M lenses to pair them with.

About 16 years ago, smartphones utterly decimated the camera industry. It's taken all this time for the market to even remotely recover – and it has done so just in time for the most powerful phone cameras ever made to challenge traditional cameras all over again.

So, can the best camera phone of 2026 outperform the best mirrorless camera on the market when it comes to photography? And I'm not talking about an iPhone versus a random Canon here.

I'm talking about two best-in-class photo machines built on the same industry-leading color science: the 200MP Oppo Find X9 Ultra with its Hasselblad Master camera Mode versus the 100MP Hasselblad X2D II 100C with its Hasselblad Natural Color Solution.

ABOVE: Watch the video and see who won the shootout!

Of course, while both systems are built on the same imaging pipeline, there are important differences – not least sensor size. The X2D II packs a massive medium format sensor, while you could put all four of the X9's sensors together (those being a 1/1.12-inch, 1/1.28-inch, 1/1.95-inch and 1/2.75-inch) and they still wouldn't be as big.

Four sensors also means four lenses (and cameras) on the phone: a main 200MP 23mm f/1.5, a 50MP 14mm f/2.0 ultrawide, and a pair of telephotos in the form of a 200MP 70mm f/2.2 and a 230mm f/3.5 – all equivalent 35mm focal lengths.

So to make this comparison as fair as possible, given that all those lenses are fixed in the phone, I paired the camera with a single zoom lens: the Hasselblad XCD 35-100E, which gave me an equivalent 27-78mm f/2.8-4 focal range (I left the 230mm lens out of the equation, for sake of ease).

Rather than setting up fixed scenes, I thought the most neutral thing to do was take both systems on a gentle stroll (around The Regent's Park in London, England) to see how they performed in spontaneous real-world conditions.

Oppo Find X9 Ultra vs Hasselblad X2D II

There's no doubt about it: the Oppo is hands-down the best camera phone you can buy right now. Between its excellent lenses and the Hasselblad Master image tuning, this is the most "camera-like" performance you can get on a phone.

In ideal conditions, I think you would be very hard pressed to tell that its photos weren't taken on a mirrorless camera… but what about non-ideal conditions like blazing direct sunlight, harsh contrasty backlight and hue-torturing green grass gardens?

This is why we always field test equipment in our reviews on Digital Camera World, because fixed setups and carefully controlled studio shoots only tell you so much.

I dare say that, in a straight-up portrait or landscape or still life shoot, the results might be much closer. But head to head, in unflattering wildcard conditions, the Hasselblad truly outclasses the Oppo.

Colors

The first thing that jumped out to me was the color. If you've ever tried to shoot grass, gardens or flowers, you'll know how tricky it can be for even the best cameras to render authentic hues and tones.

Green plays havoc with most cameras' imaging engines, but Hasselblad cameras are renowned for their ultra-faithful reproduction of even these challenging colors. However, the Oppo would start to struggle when magenta tones were introduced to the scene, as you can see in the above image of the bees feeding on flowers.

Indeed, the Oppo is apt to skew towards magenta in general – and it can be prone to punching up the blues to compensate, which is visible in the shot of the parked Mini where the highlights are overcooked with blue tones.

Dynamic range

That "overcooking" is a byproduct of the Oppo's heavy reliance on computational HDR (high dynamic range), which uses software-based masking and stacking to artificially boost the shadows while dimming the highlights.

In the crosswalk / zebra crossing shot above, you can see that this does really funky things to skies, looking like you've used the Magic Wand selection tool in Photoshop to do a very crude sky selection.

In the top image of the backlit building in the garden, the Oppo is trying so hard to HDR its way to even exposure that it has rendered the building completely flat – there's no sense of shadow or dimension. It's like the Shadows slider has been cranked all the way up while the Highlights sliger has been dragged right down.

The middle shot of the parked BMW is probably the happiest medium, but in all three images you can see that the Hasselblad – with 15.3 stops of dynamic range – is able to render faithful tonality without any computational correction.

Lenses

Even without adding the fantastic 300mm teleconverter, the Oppo's integrated 230mm telephoto lens absolutely smokes the 78mm maximum reach of the Hasselblad lens, as you can see in the top image of the water feature.

However, while the Oppo's 230mm camera produces a 50MP image, the Hasselblad captures images at 102MP.

And thanks to the superior optical formula of the much larger lens, coupled with the superior optical performance of the much larger sensor, you can perform a like-for-like crop into the Hassy image and actually achieve superior detail – as evidenced by the middle image.

Speaking of optical performance, the lenses on the Oppo (like all smartphones) is very prone to lens flare. But as you can see in the above image, thanks to premium lens coatings, the Hasselblad lens wasn't affected at all – even without deploying the lens hood.

Bokeh / blur

As if there was any doubt, the Oppo simply can't match the Hasselblad when it comes to subject separation – aka blurry backgrounds, aka shallow depth of field, aka bokehliciousness.

Its sensors are so small that they struggle to achieve a shallow depth of field, even though its lenses are pretty fast (ranging from f/1.5-3.5) while the XCD lens on the Hasselblad is more sedate (at f/2.8-4).

While you can "cheat" background blur by increasing the distance between your subject(s) and background, you can see just how much more blur is achieved with the Hasselblad when shooting things that are close together.

Long exposure

Some might think this one is a bit unfair, but since we passed a beautiful waterfall I wanted to shoot a long exposure image where the flowing water turns silky smooth.

This requires shooting with a very slow shutter speed, which typically means using a tripod to keep the image steady – and in sunny conditions it usually necessitates an ND filter, too, as a slow shutter speed will quickly overexpose the image.

Sadly, I simply couldn't juggle the shutter and aperture enough on the Oppo to do anything other than freeze the water into unpleasant, static splashes – not the effect I wanted.

As you can see above, though, the Hasselblad had no problem shooting handheld for a full second – a piece of cake, thanks to the generous lens aperture and ten stops of in-body image stabilization – giving me the silky water I wanted.

So I tried cheating and slapped an ND filter onto the Oppo – but even then, as you can see, the phone wasn't able to shoot a handheld full second exposure without blurring the image (and blowing it out), as it simply lacks the stabilization and exposure finesse of the Hasselblad.

Verdict

I know that this reads very one-sidedly, so I feel it's important to say that – in its own right – the Oppo Find X9 Ultra performed heroically. I took a few pictures on my iPhone during the same shoot, and honestly it's embarrassing just how much better Oppo's camera tech is than Apple's.

The X9 Ultra takes impressively "camera-like" photographs and offers an amazing degree of manual control and impressive color processing. However, in a straight shootout with the X2D II, there's no contest here.

The Hasselblad is the finest stills camera ever made, boasting a gigantic medium format sensor with 100MP resolution, 15.3 stops of dynamic range, 10 stops of image stabilization and some of the finest lenses money can buy. As good as the Oppo is, there's simply no way it can match that firepower.

But let's add some context here. The fact that a £1,400 phone can come as close as it does to a £6,400 camera – with a £4,100 lens on the front – is absolutely astonishing.

Yes, the Hasselblad is better. But is it £9,100 better? I'll let you be the judge of that…

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Hasselblad cameras and the best Hasselblad lenses to go with them.

First introduced in 1972, Kodak’s “Pocket Instamatic” 110 film cameras proved remarkably popular. It quickly became one of the most successful film formats ever introduced, with dozens of manufacturers – including Canon, Minolta, Pentax and Olympus – producing 110 cameras.

What they gave up in image quality, they more than made up for in convenience. They were small, light and easily carried anywhere.

At its peak in the late 1970s and early 1980s, hundreds of millions of 110 film cartridges were sold annually, making it one of the dominant amateur photography formats of its era. But the 110 format soon acquired a reputation for mediocre results.

This came about from a combination of inexpensive (often plastic) lenses, necessitated by the low price of most 110 cameras, along with the amount of magnification needed to make standard prints (because of the tiny 13x17mm negative), even though the 110 negative was about twice the area of the later, short-lived, Kodak Disc cameras.

Not to mention the problems of keeping the film perfectly flat, given the inherent variability of the injection-molded, plastic film cartridge… However, a few companies set out to prove that reputation was not deserved, and to a large extent, succeeded.

First to arrive, in 1976, was the Minolta 110 Zoom SLR, with its distinctive, horizontal design and a fixed 25-50mm f/4.5 zoom lens. Though compact, it was still somewhat larger than the Asahi Pentax 110 Auto that would come almost two years later.

The 110 Auto proved to be the smallest interchangeable lens SLR camera ever made – for any format, by anybody.

It had TTL center-weighted metering and a programmed electronic shutter ranging from 1 sec to 1/400 sec, needing two LR44 batteries to function. It could also be bought as the "System 10," which included the full kit of lenses (18mm, 24mm, 50mm, 70mm and, in 1982, a 20-40mm f/2.8 zoom), dedicated AF130P / AF100P flashes and an auto-winder.

It was followed in 1982 by the 110 Super, which improved upon the original 1978 Auto 110 with several key upgrades: a single-stroke film advance lever, an electronic self-timer with a red LED indicator, a shutter lock and a +1.5 EV exposure compensation button for backlit scenes.

It also featured a brighter viewfinder with a split-image focusing spot and a low-light warning LED. Remarkable, for a 164g camera just 99 x 58 x 32mm in size.

I had the opportunity to play with a Pentax 110 Auto for some weeks, while I sold it for a friend. I didn’t run any film through it, but I was impressed with the quality of the build and finish. Absolutely remarkable! And I admit, I rather regret not purchasing it myself.

One interesting fact: the Pentax Auto 110's excellent interchangeable lenses were capable of resolving much more detail than the 110 negative could usually record, which is one reason Auto 110 photographs can look surprisingly sharp when carefully scanned today.

The Pentax 110 Super was discontinued in 1985, as the 110 format lost market share to ever-more-compact 35mm cameras that offered sharper pictures. Because of this there were roughly 80,000 Supers produced, whereas the 110 Auto saw approximately 1.1 million being made.

Kodak discontinued Ektachrome and Kodachrome 110 slide films in 1982. Verichrome Pan (B&W) went in 1995 while Kodacolor 110 survived until 2006, leaving Fujifilm as the only mainstream maker. It would then give up production of 110 films in 2009, seemingly ending the format forever…

However, in 2011 Lomography started slitting larger film and packaging it into new 110 cartridges, with Lomography's Orca 110 B&W ISO100 reaching the market in May 2012.

Around the same time, Fukkatsu 110 film was produced by a small group associated with the now long-gone 'Films Reborn' in Hong Kong. It briefly appeared in ISO 100 B&W and ISO400 color in pre-loaded 110 cartridges, but by mid-2012 it was being described as “gone / vanished.”

Today, 110 film can still be purchased by mail from Lomography – but it is about the only source. That said, it's possible for truly dedicated fans to repackage 16mm film into recycled 110 cassettes at home – though it is a job for only the most ambitious of fans.

Read more of David Young's ongoing series on classic cameras, as well as his book A Brief History of Photography.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best point-and-shoot cameras you can buy today.

Leica is a camera company that has always dared to be different and do things that other camera makers wouldn't dare to do. This approach has proved to be a great success in recent years – and has brought the German company record-breaking profits.

While continuing with both its iconic digital and film rangefinder cameras, Leica has diversified into other areas. It continued to make compact cameras when others gave up on them – partly through its own Q range, but also in collaboration with Fujifilm and Panasonic.

Working closely with other companies has become part of the Leica success story, with Xiaomi on camera phones and founding the L-Mount Alliance for mirrorless lens production.

On a recent trip to the company's Wetzlar HQ for the launch of the Leica SL3-P, I had the opportunity to talk to Andrea Pacella, Leica's VP of global marketing and communications, and quiz him to find out more about Leica's innovative approach…

Not to speak of autofocus; autofocus was invented by Leica. You can see it in the museum – the first autofocus cameras were developed by Leica. The project was called Correfot, and it was a real idea for autofocus. But I don't know if they didn't believe in it, weren't able to produce it industrially, or didn't have enough money to develop the project.

What happened is that the project was shifted to Minolta, who at the time was Leica's partner for electronics. Minolta was the first to launch an autofocus SLR camera with the Maxxum 7000. Leica was not able to hop on the autofocus SLR train, so we progressively lost ground.

Then we entered the 2000s, when Leica was also late on digital. We caught up with the M8 and then the M9, and then we were back on track. We developed the S camera system, which was a DSLR, but it was big, had limited lenses, was medium format, and very expensive, so it was a very niche product.

At a certain point, the idea was: "What do we do? Do we go on with DSLRs?" No, because developing another one was no longer where the market was heading. "Can we only live with the M system?" We didn't know if that was feasible long-term.

Then came the great idea to be among the first to move to full-frame digital mirrorless cameras. If you think back to 2015 when Leica came out with the first SL, the only full-frame mirrorless system on the market was Sony's. Nikon and Canon were still making DSLRs; they were very late.

So we were among the first, and we made a good decision to say, "Okay, we need to serve professional photographers. We need to give our customers an alternative to the M system."

We dared to try it and developed the first SL. That then became the SL2, then the SL3, up to the latest iteration, the SL3-S. So it was the right move to make.

The problem was that when we launched the first SL, there was no established mirrorless market. Sony was only selling the A7 series at the time, and it was half the price of our Leica SL. What changed later was that our competitors saw that Leica was having success in the higher price segment.

In the last five to six years, our competitors also started releasing flagship cameras at high prices – at "Leica prices." Sony added the A9 and then the A1. Canon brought in high-end mirrorless models like the R3 and R1 series.

They all brought in top-tier cameras, and paradoxically, if you look at the price lists – knowing street price is another story – the Leica SL is not the most expensive camera on the market any more. Canon, Nikon, and Sony all have cameras that cost as much or more than a Leica.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Leica cameras, along with the best Leica M lenses for rangefinders and the best Leica SL lenses for mirrorless.

If you, like me, live in an area prone to wildfires, you know the dangers. But wildfires also present some remarkable opportunities to make spectacular images.

I have lived in the small, western Canadian town of Logan Lake for 22 years, and in that time we have had many small fires (sadly, some deliberately set) and two major fires.

In 2021 the Tremont Creek fire burned 63.548 hectares / 157,029 acres of forest. Our town was evacuated, and the flames came within 1,000 feet / 300 meters of our home. Fortunately, not a single home or garden shed was lost thanks to some amazing firefighters.

So, while there are terrific photo opportunities, there are also some ground rules that must be observed – both for your own safety and for the safety of the wildland firefighters.

First, never get close to the fire. It can kill you. Worse, your getting in the way can put the lives of the firefighters in danger.

The second is to never use flash. Not even fill flash, no matter how good an idea it seems at the time. Speaking as an old pilot, a flash can be distracting – and when a pilot is distracted, even momentarily, while flying that close to the ground, it can be disastrous.

Third, if you own a drone, never fly it near a fire, for very obvious reasons. All that said, there are great opportunities for making remarkable images.

One of the great places to start is with the smoke. You need not be close to a fire, for the smoke can travel hundreds of miles, but you do need to be observant.

Above is a shot taken at 05:00, from a motel parking lot, while walking the dog. There were no nearby fires, but the air was thick with wildfire smoke and the rising sun was almost blocked. I couldn't resist the view over parked transport trucks.

I got my start shooting wildfires back in 2009, by making the lead image at the top this article.

We’d been down at our local horse club and noticed a light plume of smoke in the distance. When a lady we knew arrived, we asked her if she knew the cause. “A car fire," she said. So, when we were done, about ten minutes later, we bundled the grandkids (then aged six and eight) and drove up to check out this car fire.

We found the fire, but not the car. As we stood, watching, the Bird-Dog (a small, fast, highly maneuverable plane that directs water bombers and air tankers as they fight the fire) came in for a low pass, with a very loud fire engine’s siren playing through a loudspeaker.

I didn’t know they did that, but it’s a warning to those on the ground that an air tanker or water bomber is coming and to get out of the way!

Moments later, a Conair S-2 Firecat (first photo) came in and dropped his retardant. Luckily I had my camera with me, as I nearly always do. We were about 130 feet / 40 meters from the action, but there was nobody around to tell us otherwise. So we stood and watched, and when the mop-up crew came in by helicopter 20 minutes later we went home!

But the shot is sharp enough that, in an 8x10 print, you can clearly see the pilot flipping switches on the panel above his head.

The fire turned out to be deliberately set and, as the crow flies, only 3.5 miles / 5.5 kilometers from our front door! I was glad to see that one put out.

In May 2018 I was driving home on Tunkwa Lake Road when I came across this lone helicopter, putting out a very small fire. It was equipped with a belly tank, rather than a bucket on a long line, and was flitting between a pond, where he loaded up, and the fire, which was less than 1,000 feet / 330 meters away.

Again he was working solo, and there was nobody on the ground to interfere with, so I stopped, got out and fired away. The light was perfect!

As I write this, we are under an evacuation alert – which means that we must be ready to leave on a moment’s notice. The Guichon (pronounced Gee-shone) Creek wildfire is less than 0.9 miles / 1.5 kilometers from my front door.

Cars are packed with photos, important papers and a few keepsakes. Fuel tanks are full and nobody wants to stray far from home, so there is lots of time to photograph the air tankers and such.

But there is a slight problem. As the air tankers come in to drop their load of retardant, what you’d expect to be a lovely, tack-sharp shot of the plane dropping its bright-red retardant turns out to be anything but.

First of all, to get a decent close-up of the planes you’ll be shooting with a long lens, likely the longest you have (I use a 100-400mm on a Micro Four Thirds camera and it’s nearly always at 400mm, which is 800mm in full frame terms), and the smoke creates a haze that can mute the colors.

Second is that the intense heat rising from the fire below can create hot, turbulent air that distorts everything, much in the same way that objects in the distance look distorted across an expanse of hot desert, or far away on a hot highway.

If you are lucky enough to have the small Air Tractor AT-802 converted crop dusters, you can always go to the nearby lake where they skim the surface to reload their tanks. A small pipe extends into the water, and they scoop up 793 gallons / 3,000 liters of water in just 15 seconds!

You certainly won’t bother any of the firefighters there, and watching six of them come in at once, just eight to ten seconds apart, is really quite spectacular. Just stand on the shore and shoot!

Even if you’re not near a fire, there is still lots to photograph. The moon is a great candidate to shoot through wildfire smoke. If the smoke is really thick, you can try the sun, such as the shot above, taken in the early evening. (Never point your lens at the sun, unless it is extremely dim!)

The texture you see is not “grain” or “noise”, but the particulates of smoke in the air. If possible, wait until the sun is low enough to include a tree, building or something else to give it scale.

Lastly, there are always interesting things to shoot after the fire is out. The landscape often looks more like a moonscape.

If your area has / had evergreen trees, you’ll notice that when the needles burn, they do not turn black nor do they get consumed. They become an odd shade of yellow / orange and, had you told me this before I saw it for myself, I’d never have believed you, but it’s true. We call them “never greens” and the needles finally drop off four to five years later.

Both during and after a wildfire, there's lots to photograph without being a “pain in the patoot” for the firefighters. But honestly? I hope you never have the chance.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best telephoto lenses to get maximum reach for your shots.

I have been photographing solar eclipses for the last 47 years, and in the first two parts of the series I recounted my first four efforts at photographing them on land and sea around the American continent.

My next, and last, three solar eclipses were experienced in the last ten years, and were very different. First because I was not using digital cameras, rather than film. But more importantly, the internet was now everywhere. And its influence on what became “The Great American Eclipse” was unbelievable…

My fifth solar eclipse: August 21 2017

I’d chosen to go to Orin Junction, Wyoming, to see this eclipse. About 8 to 10 minutes further down the road was Glendo, Wyoming, and I’m sure glad I didn’t go there! Well, we did go there, but we’ll come back to that.

We got off to a good start, at the US border, where I was detained in handcuffs, and taken straight to a cell. There they were busy instructing me how to place my feet – a pattern I knew from an ex-con who’d told me that was the placement so that when you drop your drawers and bend over for a cavity search, you don’t fall over. It was not something I was looking forward to! At that moment, a female border agent dashed into the room, yelling, “You’ve got the wrong man!” Instantly the agent’s tone changed from their polite, but officious manner to a soft, “Well, we’d best get these handcuffs off you!”

I never did learn who they were looking for, though I think I know why. Still, we were delayed two hours, our car searched by both agents and dogs, but eventually sent on our way. It’s not an experience I’d want to repeat.

The “place to be” was Casper, Wyoming, as it was a major center, and on the centre-line. But hotel prices were ridiculous and we ended up in Sheridan, two hours' drive north of Casper, where I could reserve a room for only double the usual price. And that reservation was made almost two years before the event. For this was truly the age of the internet. The eclipse had been promoted as “The Great American Eclipse” and was, indeed, the first to cross the USA since 1979.

Thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people across the US, were encouraged to go at the last minute. Without planning. They thought they’d just go and pick up a motel room, along the way. Much as we had done many years before.

Our room had a window, overlooking the pathway to the motel’s office. All evening long, we watched people leaving, often in tears. They’d come at the suggestion of the internet, without reservations, and had gone, motel to motel, desperately looking for a room.

The morning of the eclipse we headed south at 5.30 am, and when we got to Casper my wife said she’d like a cup of tea. I pulled into a McDonald’s which was busier than any restaurant I’d ever seen. It took us well over 90 minutes to get a single cup of tea. As we drove, every park in Casper was filled with tripods and telescopes. Every wide spot on the Interstate 25, was chock full of people and telescopes.

I’d selected Orin Junction as it was almost perfectly on the center-line, with prospects of good seeing yet small enough (a population of just under 50 at the time) to not encourage people to go there. But I missed the turnoff and ended up in Glendo, just down the road. They’d been silly enough to put a notice on the internet saying they were on the center-line and were welcoming eclipse chasers. This little town of 209 people received some 50,000 visitors! We used their overpass to turn around, but access to the town itself was blocked by police cars with flashing lights. That town was full!

We got back to Orin Junction to find it consisted of a single, Sinclair gas station, and parked cars as far as the eye could see. Parking looked to be impossible! Luckily, someone pulled out, presumably heading for a better position, so I pulled in. We set up our tripod and chairs in the ditch, some 25 feet (8 meters) away, and had a wonderful view!

By that time, I was using Leica’s 400mm f/6.8, “trombone focus” lens for my wildlife shots, and trying to find the sun with a filter on is difficult. The easy, low-cost solution is a DIY Pinhole Projection Finder. Dimensions are not critical and mostly determined by how your lens is made. You can use cardboard, wood, stiff boxboard or whatever you’ve got, I used acrylic plastic as I had some to spare. I used bits of cylindrical rod (wooden doweling would work) for my base as it will adapt to any diameter lens. The front has a black card with a tiny (1mm or so) hole. The rear panel has a white or cream card. On eclipse day, mount your finder on your lens with a rubber band, gaffers or masking tape, or what-have-you. I used a large hose clamp with a small piece of fabric underneath to prevent scratching.

On eclipse day, with your filter on, find the sun and make a small X where the beam of light from the hole in the front panel hits the rear panel. That’s it. As the sun moves during the eclipse, it’s bog-simple to loosen your tripod head and reset it so the spot of light is still on the X. When most eclipses last only a minute or three, this speed and convenience is essential. It works remarkably well and is completely safe. I suggest you make on early, and test it before the eclipse.

This was my first eclipse using a digital camera and I quickly discovered that unlike film, the shiny surface of my sensor created repeating reflections with the glass solar filter. The cure was to simply tilt the filter on the lens (see photo above) for a quick fix.

Some 20,000 people had gone to the Baja for the 1991 Eclipse. Some 100,000+ people went to the area around Casper, Wyoming. And the difference was the internet.

My sixth solar eclipse: October 14 2023

The best laid plans.... I’d booked a motel in Winnemucca, Nevada, a small town of 8000 souls, which was right on the centerline of the Annular eclipse. I’ve still not been to Winnemucca, as just before I was to leave, my wife was thrown from a horse and spent the next 20 days in the hospital.

My trip was instantly cancelled, but I proved you can still get some fascinating shots, even if you’re 1160km (720 miles) off the centre-line. Of course, from my backyard it was only a partial eclipse, and the clouds were so thick that the shot above was taken without a solar filter!

My seventh solar eclipse: April 8 2024

The peak duration for this eclipse was in Texas, but we opted for Milan, Ohio, so we could pick up a favorite cousin in Michigan and, at 90 years of age, have her see her first eclipse. Totality was still almost three minutes. As per the new standard, we booked well over a year ahead, and discovered that while the town was packed, our hotel was on the outskirts, and had a huge, empty field adjacent to the property. So, we watched the eclipse from there, with a few family members and a small number of other hotel guests. Some thin, high clouds did not hinder the view. Very civilized.

Be sure to have a proper filter on your lens at all times – other than during totality. Remember, the pentaprisms in SLRs make a distinctive “tink” when they get too hot and crack, because someone didn’t use a filter and aimed their camera at the sun! It is also easy to burn your sensor in a mirrorless camera if aimed at the sun, without a filter in place. And never look at the sun through binoculars (unless they are specialist solar binoculars), or a camera with a telephoto lens without a filter attached. Both capture far more light than your eye, and it is super easy to permanently damage your eye. Most of all, don’t get so involved with your camera that you forget to look up! It’s a sight you’ll never forget!

The next North American total solar eclipse will be August 22 2044 with the eclipse underway at sunrise in Greenland. An unusually wide (281 miles/453 km) path of totality will then sweep across the Arctic, traverse parts of BC and nearly all of Alberta and parts of Saskatchewan, before winding up in Montana and the Dakotas. Totality peaks at two minutes and four seconds. I’m pushing 80 now, so I’m not sure I’ll see that one. But, I hope you do.

Steve McCurry is probably one of the best-known living photographers – famous for his National Geographic shoots and that mesmerizing shot of the Afghan Girl, which he shot in 1984 on Kodachrome using a Nikon FM2 with a Nikkor 105mm lens.

Aged 76, McCurry is still very actively shooting new images today. And when I bumped into him at the recent Leica SL3-P launch in Germany, I was amazed to find out that the legendary Magnum photographer almost always uses just one lens today: a Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90mm f/2.8-4 Asph zoom.

"I do about 95% of all my shooting with that one lens, whether it's corporate, advertising or personal work", he explains.

In fact, he hasn't just gone down to using this one fast standard zoom; he has also stripped down his whole camera kit.

"In the really old days, I used to have a camera bag with all my stuff," he recalls. "Then I went from that to a photo vest with two cameras, both with fixed lenses, lots of film and maybe a third lens.

"My system now is a 24-90mm lens, one body, a few cards and a couple of batteries. I have no bag, nothing – just cards and batteries in a pocket."

McCurry switched from Nikon with the launch of the Leica SL2 back in 2019 – but it wasn't a move that he made on a whim, or simply because Leica was keen to have him on board.

"I did a very careful analysis," he explained. "I took my Nikon, I took the Leica, and I shot test pictures in the studio and went on the street. I took some of my assistants out. We did some portraits. We did kind of a chart, and we did this over some days.

"It became evident that the Leica lenses were crisper, sharper, had better resolution. It just became obvious that that was a direction that I should go in, after all that careful analysis.

"What really matters is the print. I print every day in my Pennsylvania studio. Every day we're printing for books, for exhibitions, so printing is really an important thing. I need a lens that's really going to make pictures that result in great prints, and that's what I'm achieving with this SL series.

"I look at a lot of my pictures from before Leica and after Leica, and I'm noticing that with the Leica SL series, I could make much bigger prints for exhibitions than I ever could with film or with the Nikon".

Despite his former love for Kodachrome, McCurry doesn't chase after the old color slide film look with his digital cameras.

"When I work with my retoucher, I'm just trying to get the picture to look like what I saw when I was shooting. I'm never trying to achieve a Kodachrome look or a film look," he explains.

"I'm just trying to get it right and capture something that feels genuine. It's not really about the color; it's more about the emotion, the storytelling aspect of the picture. So for me, yeah, I love good, rich color – but it has to support the story".

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Leica cameras along with the best Leica M lenses for rangefinders and the best Leica SL lenses for mirrorless.

After falling out of fashion for a while, all of a sudden we've been hit with a wave of pancake lenses.

In the last few months we've seen the Kase AF 24mm f/3.8, the Viltrox AF 26mm f/2.8 Evo, the Viltrox AF 28mm f/4.5 arriving in new mounts, along with the “most requested lens of all time”, the Lensbaby Twist 28.

Right now it feels like everybody (well, except Nikon) is making pancake primes for mirrorless systems – but why is this happening all of a sudden? The answer, I think, is simple: compact cameras.

Mike and I tackled this subject on the latest Bokeh Face podcast (embedded below), and it really feels that the wildfire-like popularity of compact and point-and-shoot cameras has made everyone hungry for smaller setups and pocketable lens profiles.

Tiny Micro Four Thirds cameras like the Olympus PEN E-P7 can be paired with lenses like the 7Artisans 18mm f/6.3 II or the Olympus Fisheye Body Cap 9mm f/8 and instantly become smaller than compact cameras.

Slap a Samyang Remaster Slim on Sony's A6700 and you've got a pocket-friendly APS-C camera. Heck, add the Viltrox AF 28mm f/4.5 to the Lumix S9 and you've got a full-frame powerhouse that's the same size as the Lumix L10 compact!

ABOVE: Watch our pancake lens discussion (teed up to the start of the chat)

Mike made a point about the Fujifilm X-E5 which, paired with the Fujifilm XF 23mm f/2.8 R WR, effectively gives you a setup the size of the Fujifilm X100 VI compact – but one that also enables you to change lenses.

"When the X-E5 came out, I was like – aww yeah – X100 VI? Who gives a darn about that any more? That's redundant now, as far as I'm concerned, cause you can basically have it as an interchangeable lens camera."

If you think this is all coincidence, and that nobody has noticed the trend, you'd be mistaken.

"The combination of a pancake lens and the camera body creates a very elegant package. We therefore believe there is potential for a future range of pancake lenses,” said Fujifilm's Jun Watanabe, head of product planning for the X series.

In other words, pancake lenses are here to stay. All we need now are more similarly small mirrorless bodies – and for Nikon to learn a couple of pancake recipes.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best pancake lenses from all manufacturers.

In the early race to explore Antarctica, the Discovery Expedition led by Robert Falcon Scott, Ernest Shackleton, and Edward Wilson would end up traveling 960 miles / 1540 km in the early 1900s – but those miles were also traversed with delicate glass plates that would record the historic expedition in photographs.

August 06 marks 125 years since the Discovery Expedition left British shores, bound for Antarctica. The Discovery Expedition wasn’t behind the first-ever photos of Antarctica (that credit goes to the 1897-1899 Belgian Antarctic Expedition), but the ship was laden with more photographic equipment than any other Antarctic expedition before it.

The mission, which reached the Arctic Circle in January 1902 and continued until 1904, would result in more than 1,000 early photographs from the southernmost continent.

While ten of the crew members took photos during the British National Antarctic Expedition, chief engineer Reginald Skelton served as the team’s official photographer. Skelton worked with field cameras – large folding bellows cameras that recorded photos using specially coated glass plates.

During the team’s farthest expedition south between November 1902 and February 1903, third lieutenant Ernest Shakelton documented the three-man trek carrying a smaller camera and a few glass plates. The photographs capture a slice of the isolation that the three explorers must have felt traveling 960 miles / 1540 km largely on foot and by skis.

In one photograph, Shakelton even managed to capture a self-portrait of all three explorers by rigging a rope to the camera.

The multi-year expedition was also responsible for the first aerial photographs of Antarctica when the crew used a tethered balloon to send a single person up 800 feet

.By the time the journey ended in 1904, the Discovery Expedition was responsible for more than 1,000 early images of Arctic exploration.

Not all of the glass plates survived the expedition. Dr. Reginald Koettlitz experimented with early color photography by taking three separate photos using red, green, and blue filters and overlaying the three together, but the images are believed to be lost to history.

You may also like

Love history? Learn why color photography is all thanks to the potato.

If you’re an astrophotographer looking for an exciting and unique project, go get a calendar and put a ring around Wednesday, August 12, 2026. On that day — after lunch in North America and just before sunset in Western Europe — the sun will be eclipsed by the moon. Depending on exactly where you are, it will range from something relatively minor to a landmark celestial event for the ages. But regardless of where you are in the Northern Hemisphere, after dark, the annual Perseid meteor shower will reach its peak beneath moonless skies — and in peak Milky Way season.

Do you travel for the eclipse? Or head to dark skies for the meteor shower? On August 12, you can do both. Sure, the eclipse and the Perseids have different observing requirements, but they both reward the exact same approach. Here’s how to make a plan for an entire day and night of shooting the sky.

Read: 10 must-shoot events for astrophotographers in 2026

Planning for the solar eclipse

The eclipse itself will look very different depending on where you are in the world, though to see anything at all, you must be in Western Europe, the northwestern tip of Africa or in North America.

Total solar eclipse: Greenland, Iceland and Spain

Travelers within a narrow path of the moon’s shadow in eastern Greenland, western Iceland and northern Spain will experience totality, when the moon completely covers the sun and day briefly turns to night. Along the centerline of that path, totality will last up to 2 minutes 18 seconds (off the coast of Iceland), down to 1 minute 35 seconds in Mallorca, Spain. The further east you travel on the path, the lower the eclipse will take place in the sky, with Mallorca seeing totality minutes before sunset.

Read: 8 tips on photographing a total solar eclipse

Deep partial solar eclipse: UK, Europe and northeast Africa

Across the UK, a deep partial eclipse will occur about 90 minutes before sunset. Over 95% of the sun will be obscured from many locations, making it the most significant solar eclipse visible from Britain since 2015. Maximum eclipse occurs about 13 degrees above the horizon, so a relatively clear horizon slightly north of due west will be essential.

Across much of western and central Europe and northwest Africa, observers will also see a deep partial solar eclipse, but closer to sunset. In some locations (including Algiers in Algeria, Corsica, Venice, Vienna, Prague and Warsaw), the sun will sink below the horizon while still heavily eclipsed, creating opportunities for dramatic photography that are not possible in the UK.

Small partial solar eclipse: North America

In northeastern North America, the partial solar eclipse will be smaller, with parts of eastern Canada seeing around 50% of the sun blocked by the moon and the northeastern U.S. seeing more modest partial phases during the afternoon. The eclipse will occur high in the sky in early afternoon.

Useful resources for understanding the eclipse and simulating exactly what you’ll see from any location include TimeAndDate.com, TPE’s Eclipse Simulator and Xavier Jubier’s Interactive Google Map.

Read: How to photograph a partial solar eclipse

Planning for the Perseids

In Europe, sightlines to the eclipse will need to be taken into account, but the instinct is to choose an eclipse location first and think about the Perseids later. A better strategy is to do the reverse.

An eclipse merely requires a clear view of the sun, with light pollution irrelevant. However, to see the meteor shower at its best, you'll need dark skies far from towns and cities. That means the ideal location for August 12 is a dark-sky reserve, national park, rural coastline or remote campsite that provides a perfectly good eclipse view while also giving you excellent meteor-watching conditions later that night.

If you’re already making the effort to travel, it makes sense to choose somewhere you can stay after sunset rather than relocating immediately. Besides, if you’re in the path of totality, relocating amid post-eclipse traffic may be near-impossible.

Useful resources for finding dark skies include a light pollution map, the Dark Sky Places finder and, for the U.K, a map of Dark Sky Discovery locations.

Read: How to photograph the Perseid meteor shower

Choosing a location

For observers in the UK, the relatively low altitude of the eclipsed sun makes horizon access the priority. Coastal viewpoints, hilltops and open landscapes with a clear view to the west-northwest are where to be. Since you'll need to stay out late for the Perseids anyway, dark-sky locations such as national parks, moorland areas and remote coastlines deserve particular attention. Across Europe, the eclipse becomes a sunset event. The closer you are to the sunset line, the more important an unobstructed western horizon becomes.

In North America, the eclipse is less dramatic, which arguably makes the Perseids the main attraction. Locations in Atlantic Canada, Maine and other northeastern regions where the eclipse is most significant offer the best combination of eclipse magnitude and dark skies, making them ideal destinations for an overnight astrophotography road trip/camping trip.

Although it’s wise to choose somewhere that works for both the eclipse and the Perseids, weather could, of course, force a change of plans. Fortunately, neither the partial eclipse nor the Perseids requires a fixed observing site. Unlike totality, where being in exactly the right place matters enormously, a deep partial eclipse or a meteor shower can often be rescued with a well-timed drive to clearer skies.

Know the celestial schedule

Whether August 12 is a relaxed or tense affair will depend on where you are. In North America, the eclipse is in the afternoon and not a particularly dramatic event, meaning there’s time to take a break afterward and prepare for the Perseids. For everyone in Europe — whether in the path of totality or not — the eclipse will be tense and dramatic (particularly if there are clouds in the sky) because the prize is bigger, and there’s not much of a gap between the end of the eclipse and darkness.

However, the Perseids are best after midnight, when the radiant in the constellation Perseus climbs higher into the northeastern night sky. With the moon absent from the sky (by definition, a solar eclipse is only possible at new moon), even relatively dark rural locations should provide excellent viewing conditions. Under very dark skies, dozens of meteors per hour may be visible.

Read: How to photograph the Milky Way

Dark places for the eclipse and Perseids

Possible dark sky locations ideal for shooting both the eclipse and the peak of the Perseids across western Europe and North America are endless, but here’s a selection to give you an idea. The list does not include Greenland or Iceland, where darkness is in short supply in August, but does include some locations within the path of totality:

• Centro Astronómico Trevinca, Galicia, Spain (total solar eclipse for 40 seconds at 8:29 p.m. CEST)
• Bardenas Reales Natural Park, Navarre, Spain (total solar eclipse for 1 minute, 4 seconds at 8:28 p.m. CEST)
• Laguna de Gallocanta, Aragon, Spain (total solar eclipse for 1 minute and 42 seconds at 8:30 p.m. CEST)
• Cévennes National Park, France (96% partial solar eclipse at 8:24 p.m. CEST)
• Kerry International Dark Sky Reserve, Ireland (98% partial solar eclipse at 7:13 p.m. BST)
• Exmoor National Park & Dark Sky Reserve, England (94% partial solar eclipse at 7:14 p.m. BST)
• Eryri (Snowdonia) National Park & Dark Sky Reserve, Wales (93% partial solar eclipse at 7:11 p.m. BST)
• Brecon Beacons (Bannau Brycheiniog) Dark Sky Reserve, Wales (93% partial solar eclipse at 7:13 p.m. BST)
• Gros Morne National Park Dark Sky Preserve, Newfoundland, Canada (49% partial solar eclipse at 3:26 p.m. NDT)
• Mont-Mégantic Dark Sky Reserve, Quebec, Canada (22% partial solar eclipse at 1:49 p.m. EDT)
• Acadia National Park, Maine, U.S. (24% partial solar eclipse at 1:54 p.m. EDT)
• Cherry Springs Dark Sky Park, Pennsylvania, U.S. (7% partial solar eclipse at 1:46 p.m. EDT)

Read more:

• Astrophotography tools: the best camera, lenses and gear

• The best lenses for astrophotography

• The best star tracker camera mounts

We're fast approaching the 25th anniversary of the camera phone, at least in the West. Sure, the first commercially available camera phone - the Kyocera Visual Phone VP-210 - launched in 1999, but that was a Japan-only product. It wasn't until late 2001 that Nokia announced its first camera phone - the 7650 - and Europe got its first look at a digital camera packed into a mobile phone.

This was seriously cutting-edge kit. Standalone digital cameras were still in their infancy in 2001, with it being a couple more years until sales of digital cameras would overtake film. So to have a digital camera built into a svelte slider phone must have seemed almost worthy of something Q might give to James Bond.

The quality of the 7650's camera was never going to compete with a half-decent digital point-and-shoot of the era, as it had to make do with a VGA (0.3MP, 640 x 480 pixels) sensor, but it was the novel ability to have a camera with you wherever you went that set the 7650 apart.

And the cost to be at the bleeding edge of mobile imaging? 600 Euros, or around 1000 Euros in today's money. That might sound pretty reasonable in comparison to the cost of a flagship phone today, but for perspective, the legendary Nokia 3310 would have cost roughly one quarter of the price at the time.

This 2001 BBC news report covered the phone's announcement, but it wasn't only the camera hardware that made the 7650 special. Nokia didn't just want you to snap photos with the phone; it also wanted you to share them. Of course, this was years before social media and internet-based instant messaging services, so the only way you’d be able to wirelessly send photos (beyond line-of-sight infrared transfer) was using the (then) new MMS service.

The Multimedia Messaging Service was devised as an upgrade to existing SMS tech and meant that it wouldn’t just be text messages that could be sent between phones; you’d also be able to send photos. However, while the future was bright back then, the sun hadn't quite risen above the horizon for the mass sharing of camera phone images.

I was 16 in 2001, and therefore exactly in the demographic that had made SMS so popular. Back then in the UK a single 140-character text message cost 10 pence to send, and we would try our hardest to ruin the English language in order to send as much information as possible within that 140-character limit. Conversations that read like 'U gota d8 w/ ur gf l8r?' became standard between teens in the early 2000s, such was the financial constraints placed upon us by the strictly limited phone credit at our disposal (go just 1 character over that 140 limit and you're paying twice as much - the jeopardy was real!). Now consider that a single MMS would cost around three times the price of one SMS, while also requiring you and your recipient to both have compatible high-end handsets, and you can appreciate why the industry experts featured in that 2001 BBC report didn't expect the camera phone and instant picture messaging to take off straight away. In my personal experience, it wasn't really until 3G-capable phones and internet-based messaging took off in the late 2000s that mobile image sharing became commonplace, as there was no longer a specific cost associated with sending a photo between phones.

So next time you’re casually sharing a snap in Instagram or WhatsApp, remember that at the start of the millennium most would have thought that was science fiction.

When the Nikon Zfc released back in 2021, it brought with it the lovely retro-themed Nikon Z 28mm f/2.8 (SE). And while the absence of an aperture ring seemed like a bit of a missed opportunity, I assumed that more retro Nikon Z lenses would be on the way. Jump to the release of the Nikon Zf in 2023, along with the Nikon Z 40mm f/2 (SE), and my heart sank. Another super affordable, retro-cool lens, without the substance (an aperture ring) to back it up.

The Nikon Zf and Z fc are modeled on the legendary Nikon FM2 from the early ‘80s. And they’re by far the most faithful replications of a film-era SLR on the mirrorless camera market today. Their slimline profiles and seriously lacking grips make them feel gratifyingly unwieldy and their chunky physical dials are a tactile pleasure to shoot with. The only thing missing, then, is a lens with an aperture ring!

I’m not alone in my grievances. Such feedback has plagued the Nikon Zf and Zfc ever since each retro camera's respective release, but thankfully, third-party options are available. However, none are quite as lovely as Voigtlander’s Z-mount line up.

Voigtlander immediately gets plenty of kudos because all of its Z-mount lenses are developed and manufactured under licence, so it’s got an official thumbs up from Nikon. What’s more, a trio of specialist APS-C (DX) optics are available, such as the Voigtländer D23mm f/1.2 Nokton Z Aspherical, alongside a broader range of 10 full-frame optics, like the Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 Super Wide-Heliar Z Aspherical. That’s a decent lineup of glass!

Each Voigtlander lens feels authentically retro, too, boasting all-metal lens barrels, as well as manual-focus only designs, with many also featuring beefy scalloped grooves for better purchase. But they haven’t omitted the mod cons entirely. Lenses feature electronic contacts to supply EXIF data and work in tandem with IBIS.

And yes, they all have aperture rings.

You might also like...

Want more of my Nikon ramblings? The Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR bridges the gap between budget teles and pro-grade glass – and it’s a personal favorite. You can’t buy heritage: Why Nikon still rules as it celebrates its 109th birthday! Plus, alien world of photomicrography displayed at Tokyo Photographic Art Museum celebrates 101 years of Nikon microscopes.

The brevity of a total solar eclipse makes it unlike any other photographic subject. You can photograph wildlife every weekend, revisit a landscape whenever you want and take hundreds of attempts at deep-sky astrophotography.

A total solar eclipse offers no such luxury. The event is geographically very specific, it unfolds quickly, and the most spectacular phase lasts only a few minutes or even seconds.

That rarity is what makes eclipse photography so compelling. During totality, when the moon completely covers the sun, daylight fades to twilight, the temperature drops, shadows become strangely sharp and the solar corona emerges around the silhouette of the moon.

The challenge is to come home with memorable images without spending the entire brief event staring at the back of a camera. It’s a challenge many fail at because they don’t make decisions or prepare in advance.

Photographing a total solar eclipse: Why it’s so special

If you want to image a total solar eclipse, you must be within the narrow path of totality – the moon’s central shadow – which on 12 August 2026 is about 180 miles wide and will move over eastern Greenland, western Iceland and northern Spain. Beyond, many other places in the UK, Europe and North America will see a partial solar eclipse.

Once you’re in place, photographing a total solar eclipse requires two very different approaches. During the initial and following partial phases, the sun remains intensely bright and must be photographed through a certified solar filter.

During the brief totality, that filter must be removed because the faint corona is only visible when the sun is completely covered.

The transition between those two states happens remarkably quickly. For most photographers, the challenge is knowing exactly what to do and when to do it, while the clock is ticking.

This isn't about expensive gear. A photographer with modest kit who knows exactly what images they want, has rehearsed in advance and has read Alan Dyer’s brilliant How to Capture the Coming Solar Eclipses book will typically outperform someone with expensive gear they've never tested. Don’t be in that second group!

Photographing a total solar eclipse: Staying safe

Before even thinking about cameras and lenses, it's essential to understand eclipse safety. Whenever any portion of the sun is visible – even 1% – you must use proper solar protection for both your camera and your eyes.

For visual observing, wear eclipse glasses that comply with the ISO 12312-2 standard. For photography, use a secure front-mounted solar filter designed specifically for solar imaging.

The solar filter must be as close to the sun as possible in any setup. Never look through an optical viewfinder at the uneclipsed or partially eclipsed sun. Use Live View or an electronic viewfinder instead (doing so also helps you manually focus for a sharp image).

When photographing a total solar eclipse, you put a filter on during all partial phases and take it off only during totality. After totality ends, you put the filter back on immediately.

It’s worth noting here that the partial phases on either side are not rare and can be imaged from hundreds of miles away. You’ve traveled to the path of totality to experience and photograph totality – that’s the shot. How you take that shot, and with what, however, is up for grabs.

Photographing a total solar eclipse: Composition

Do you want a close-up of the eclipsed sun or an image of it set against a landscape? One of the biggest mistakes that first-time eclipse photographers make is unthinkingly focusing exclusively on the sun.

They see a beautiful image of the solar corona during totality and want to replicate it. In some ways, it’s classic “Instagram gaze” – a copycat composition that uses an existing image as a template rather than responding freshly to the scene in front of you.

There’s nothing wrong with this, mostly because the eclipsed sun is unique – you’ll likely capture loops of red plasma leaping from the surface of the sun around the silhouette of the moon, sparkling Baily’s beads of sunlight and a tenuous corona that is always unique.

However, it’s more of a science image. Is that what you’re after? If so, go for it. Or you could ask what the place you’re in is actually offering you – and that goes double for the 2026 total solar eclipse.

Close-up images of the corona are spectacular, but the eclipse transforms the entire landscape. Your surroundings, the changing light and the reactions of observers around you tell a more complete story. You can choose one approach – or you can attempt both.

Photographing a total solar eclipse: Equipment

For detailed solar images, a DSLR or mirrorless camera paired with a telephoto lens works best. A camera phone can record the experience, particularly during totality, but it will not give you close-up images of the sun.

Think about your goals before eclipse day. Broadly speaking, there are a handful of approaches:

• Telephoto photography of the partially and totally eclipsed sun and corona on a tripod (400-600mm lens).
• Telephoto photography of the partially and totally eclipsed sun and corona using a solar tracker on a tripod (800mm lens).
• Wide-angle images showing the landscape during totality (wide-angle lens / GoPro / smartphone) on a tripod or handheld.
• Documentary-style handheld photographs capturing people experiencing the event (smartphone)

Many experienced eclipse photographers run two cameras: one with a long lens and one with a wide-angle lens. Consider which type of image will be most meaningful to you.

Photographing a total solar eclipse: Smartphone

Look at the image above, taken from a cruise ship in 2023. It includes the ship, the people on it and the eclipse. It’s a unique image that can never be replicated – and it was taken using an iPhone.

A smartphone can do a lot during an eclipse, capturing documentary-style photographs of people wearing eclipse glasses during the partial phases, as well as a silhouette of a loved one staring skyward during totality.

In the final minutes before totality, search for crescent-shaped projections beneath trees, where gaps in the leaves act like thousands of tiny pinhole cameras.

A good way to use it is to engage the RAW or ProRAW mode, if your phone offers it, and switch off the flash (unless you want to annoy everyone). Just before totality, focus on something in the distance by touching it on your camera, then lock the focus. For polish, take the brightness slider down a touch.

Now you’re ready to take lots of wide-angle images in the first few seconds of totality – before putting your smartphone in your pocket so you can just enjoy the remaining seconds.

If possible, mount the phone on a small tripod and consider using hands-free time-lapse or video modes. Note that the super-wide lens on your smartphone is much less sensitive than the main lens.

Photographing a solar eclipse: Settings

If you’re using a telephoto lens, you need to practice focusing in advance. Autofocus can struggle with a filtered sun, so manual focus is usually the safest option.

Before eclipse day, practice taking images of the sun through your solar filter. That way, you’ve nailed the partial phases before you even get to the path of totality. Focus carefully on the sun’s edge and then leave focus untouched. You could even consider using masking tape to keep the lens in place.

It’s important to practice because solar filters differ in how much light they let through, so exposure lengths vary from around 1/25 sec for Thousand Oaks SolarLite filters (which give the sun an orangey look) and ND 1,000,000 filters, and 1/500-1/1000 sec for Baader AstroSolar filters (which give the sun a whitish look).

Exposure settings vary depending on the filter used, but a useful starting point during the partial and total phases is ISO200 and an aperture of f/8.

Review your images and adjust as needed. The goal is to preserve detail in the solar crescent without clipping highlights. Some photographers take an image of the partially eclipsed sun every five minutes so they can assemble a composite later (above).

Photographing a total solar eclipse: Settings

As a 99.99% partial eclipse transitions to totality, everything changes. Light levels plunge in seconds, a diamond ring hangs around the moon and tiny Baily’s beads of sunlight dance on the limb.

Seconds later, the corona can be seen spraying into space. It spans a huge brightness range, from the brilliant inner corona to faint outer streamers extending far from the sun.

There is no one perfect image of the solar corona – there are dozens of different exposures that will create a different image. Eclipse photographers tend to take hundreds of photos to process, blend and stack to create composite images that try to show as much of the corona as possible.

For that reason, exposure bracketing is highly recommended. If you capture a sequence of images ranging from fast shutter speeds (such as 1/1000 sec) to slower exposures (around 1 second), you’ll have a good chance of recording both fine detail and the outer corona.

For example, 1/1000 sec will get you a nice image of the bright diamond ring, but 0.5-1 seconds is how to get a big corona seconds later. A few minutes later, totality will end with a second diamond ring.

Exposures vary. The above image from Alan Dyer of the end of totality as the second diamond ring emerges is a composite of two images taken seconds apart – a 1/15 sec exposure for the corona and a 1/1000 sec exposure for the prominences and chromosphere.

It was taken with a small refractor telescope and a Canon EOS 6D Mark II camera. In this case, a polar-aligned equatorial mount was used so the camera was tracking the sky.

Consider programming an exposure sequence, or using bracketing, so that the camera works for you and makes everything as simple as possible.

When the first bright point of sunlight reappears, totality is over. Replace the solar filter immediately before continuing to photograph the remaining partial phases.

Photographing a total solar eclipse: The best approach

A total solar eclipse is such a dynamic, impressive and otherworldly experience. Instead of obsessing over the perfect image, make a plan that enables you record the event while staying present.

Prepare your equipment, rehearse your workflow and understand exactly when to remove and replace your solar filter. Then, when totality arrives, trust your preparation and take a moment to enjoy what is happening above you.

The best eclipse photograph is often not technically brilliant, but merely the one that forever reminds you of the very short time you had in front of one of nature’s most extraordinary spectacles.

You might also like…

If you're photographing the eclipse, make sure you're using the best solar filters for your camera. For astro shooting, check out the best cameras for astrophotography, the best lenses for astrophotography and the best star tracker camera mounts.

The email pings, so you go check it. The request is vague, but the budget is "tight". Translation: they're hoping you'll work cheap for exposure that never materializes. Those wonderful exposure dollars that pay for nothing.

More warning signs show up if you're paying attention early on. They may be slow to respond about project details, but demanding about turnaround times. Emailing at odd hours, expecting immediate replies. Copying multiple stakeholders who all have opinions but none have decision-making authority.

These aren't just annoying quirks. They're previews of what working with them will be like.

Watch for scope creep before the contract is even signed (and, yes, you need a contract). "Just a quick headshot session" becomes "actually, can we do team photos, and some product shots, and maybe capture some behind-the-scenes content?"

The project expands but the budget doesn't. If they're already pushing boundaries during negotiations, imagine what happens once you've delivered files. Endless revisions, extended payment dates.

The comparison game is a red flag. "Our nephew has a camera," or "We saw AI can do this now," or "Another photographer quoted less." They're not looking for your specific skills or vision. They're looking for the cheapest option and hoping you'll undercut yourself to win the work.

And then there’s the communication style. They can’t articulate what they actually want but will definitely know it when they see it. Demanding to review full edited galleries before paying. Questioning your process or timeline when they've never shot professionally.

These aren't detail-oriented clients. They're clients who don't trust you and won't suddenly start once the shoot begins.

The financial reality is straightforward: difficult clients cost more than they pay. Every extra revision round eats up your time. Expanded scope without expanded budget kills your margins. Delayed payment disrupts cash flow and wastes time as you have to hunt for it.

Then there’s the time spent managing unrealistic expectations. Time better spent finding better clients or doing better work.

The complication in smaller markets is that you'll encounter them again. You can't burn bridges carelessly. But you can decline professionally. Be honest about capacity constraints. Suggest alternatives who might be better suited. Price yourself out rather than outright refusing. The goal is to say no without making enemies.

Learn to trust your gut. When something feels off in initial conversations, it usually is. The money you save by not taking bad jobs isn't just the fee you don't earn. It's the opportunity cost of having your schedule blocked by nightmare projects instead of available for clients who value your work.

Even if you’re an amateur who's taking occasional work, don’t be taken advantage of. If they didn’t think there was value to the work, they wouldn’t approach you.

Saying no is professional. It protects your time, your rates, and your reputation. The confidence to walk away changes how you negotiate. You set proper boundaries because you know you don't need every job that comes through.

Some work just isn't worth doing, at any price.

You might also like…

Still feeling brave? Check out the best professional cameras to tackle your client work!

Kodak had a long history of introducing what seems to be ever-smaller film formats. We’ve had 127 roll film (1912), 35mm cartridge film (1934), 828 roll film (1935), 126 or Instamatic cartridge film (1963), 110 cartridge film (1972), Kodak Disc film (1982) and the Advanced Photo System or APS cartridge film (1996).

All were aimed at simplifying film loading, making cameras easier to use and, thus, increasing the number of “Kodak Moments” that people took – and, in turn, increasing Kodak’s film and processing profits. But industry observers like to point out that there are three more reasons for doing this.

First, the smaller the negative the more “rolls” of film can be cut from the same master roll, making them more profitable. Second, something “new” on the market always boosts sales. Finally, selling the new, specialized processing equipment to photo-finishers was also profitable.

Introduced in 1982, Kodak Disc films used a plastic cartridge just 66 x 54 by 4mm thick. The film itself was contained in an internal disk roughly 65mm / 2.5 inches in diameter, with the 15 individual negatives arranged like pieces of a pie. Sort of like a View-Master reel.

One of Kodak's design goals was to make the cartridge thin enough that a Disc camera could be genuinely pocket-sized – and there it succeeded! Disc cameras were often just 25-30mm thick.

But these ever-smaller negative sizes came with some built-in problems. The major one was that the smaller the negative, the more it has to be magnified to make a given-sized print. Thus, the film grain showed in the final image.

If the films were to be very fine grain, they were “slower” and needed longer exposures – which resulted in more blurry images. Film that is not held flat (not easy, in an inexpensive plastic cartridge) also creates blurry images. And this blur was magnified when making enlargements.

The Kodak Disc cameras reached the pinnacle of these problems. The negative size was the smallest consumer format that Kodak ever made. Smaller than the 110 films and even slightly smaller than that of the tiny Minox “spy” cameras.

Put another way, the Disc negative was just 10% the area of a 35mm one. So the negative had to be enlarged 14 times to make a 4x6in standard print and 25x to make an 8x10in enlargement. By comparison, a 35mm negative is enlarged just over 4x for a 4x6in print and 8.5x for the 8x10. This increased magnification also made any flaws more visible.

In other words, the tiny Minox negative required virtually the same enlargement as a Disc negative. Yet Minox photographs normally looked much better, because Minox cameras had excellent film flatness due to their top-quality manufacturing and superior lenses. Of course, they were also significantly more expensive.

Kodak attempted to overcome the Disc film’s flatness problem by using film with a stable polyester base and a hybrid pressure plate system that pressed the film flat only for the moment of exposure, reducing its tendency to curl.

It was a clever mechanical workaround, but ultimately limited by the accuracy of the plastic moulding process and the small negative size.

These much higher magnifications, coupled with the lower quality plastic lenses found in many Disc cameras, meant that users did not get the results they were expecting. (To be fair, the better models did have glass lenses, but not of the quality found in the Minox and other top-line sub-miniatures.)

In the late 1980s Kodak slowly reduced its Disc camera lineup as demand shrank, quietly discontinuing them as stocks sold out. Mass production had ended in 1988 and stocks were gone by the end of 1990. It was a classic case of convenience winning initial sales but image quality limiting long-term success. After just eight years, they were gone.

The last Disc films were made in 1998 or 1999, leaving the cameras as collectors' curiosities.

Read more of David Young's ongoing series on classic cameras, as well as his book A Brief History of Photography.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Kodak cameras on the market today, spanning some of the best compact cameras and the best bridge cameras.

I was recently in Wetzlar, Germany, the home of Leica for the launch of the high-octane Leica SL3-P full-frame mirrorless camera.

During one of the presentations, Leica's VP of global marketing and communications, Andrea Pacella, told the assembled influencers and members of the press what the best-selling Leica was. And I was shocked by what I found out.

It wasn't the Leica M range of rangefinder cameras, which built the company's reputation. It wasn't the popular D-Lux 8, which has enjoyed a great success thanks to the rising popularity of compact cameras. And it was not the Sofort 2, Leica's most affordable camera.

No, the best seller is the Leica Q range of full-frame compacts that cost upwards of $7,350 / £5,650. We love the Q3 range but, with those luxury price tags, I was gobsmacked that it was these models that sold so well.

I got to sit down with Andrea Pacella to quiz him on just why the ten-year-old Leica Q range has been such a sales success.

"The idea that there could be a market for a €5,000 compact camera in a world destined to be dominated by the smartphone – where compact cameras were selling less and less – was bold," Pacella explains.

Then he points out that Leica has a long history of bold launches – right from Ernst Leitz II's decision to risk it all on Oskar Barnack's idea of a handheld camera over 100 years ago.

Acts of courage

"There were many acts of courage after that. Launching the Leicaflex SL2, the M3, and crucially, not giving up the rangefinder when it seemed completely dead in the 1970s.

"The M5 was not successful; the market was moving toward SLRs, and the Japanese manufacturers were invading the market with cameras. There seemed to be no more space for Leica," Pacella continues.

"The same courage applied to not stopping production on film cameras when we were selling only a few hundred per year. We kept the production lines, we kept the machines, and we kept the knowledge. Then, when the rebirth of film happened – and now it is a massive hype – we were there. We were the only ones.

"We have taken a lot of these bold, brave decisions in our history; it is rooted in the Leica mentality".

The secret of the Q's success

"We didn't understand it at the time, but the product managers believed in it and eventually convinced us. What made the first Leica Q so successful was that 28mm is the exact field of view people are used to on their smartphones. The angle of view you got on an iPhone was a 28mm equivalent.

"This meant that a lot of people who weren't used to traditional photography, who weren't passionate photographers and maybe didn't even know who Henri Cartier-Bresson or Elliott Erwitt were, or what aperture and ISO meant, found a comfortable, familiar view when they looked through the camera.

"These are small things, but they are incredibly important. The other crucial factor was keeping the form factor of the M system. From a distance, the Q looks like an M. I often describe the Q as a Leica M that is easier to use, featuring a view that everyone is already comfortable with, and costing less than an M lens alone.

"At the beginning, some people would joke, 'You pay for the lens and get the camera for free'. But if you think about how much a standalone M-mount Summilux 28mm f/1.4 lens costs, the lens alone costs as much as the entire Q camera.

"It was a combination of well-thought-out, courageous elements. When you shoot with a Leica Q and see the pictures, you are blown away.

"People started understanding the beauty of shooting at f/1.4 on a full-frame sensor – having the subject in sharp focus while everything else softens away. It gives a pleasure to the eye that you simply cannot get with a smartphone."

Sales figures

Today, Leica offers a choice of three Q cameras: the standard Q3 with its 28mm lens, the Q3 Monochrom with its black-and-white sensor, and the more recent Leica Q3 43. So which is the most popular of the trio, and by how much?

Of the three, it is the Monochrom that turns out to be the niche product.

"The Monochrom was another very courageous act", explains Pacella. "I remember the comments at the time: 'They are crazy. They are arrogant. How do they think they can sell a camera that only shoots black-and-white for more money than a camera that shoots color?'

"The Monochrom cameras are a sort of act of appreciation for our core customers. We don't make them strictly for volume; we could sell the same total number of cameras just by making them in color.

"They don't fundamentally change the overall volume of the system, but they are a thank-you to the people who love that medium."

And the winner is…

You might also like…

Take a look at the best Leica cameras across the entire range, along with the best Leica M lenses for rangefinders and the best Leica SL lenses for mirrorless bodies.

When you don't have a studio but love using light, you go through a whole series of gear changes before landing on something that actually works. For the self-taught photographer, that usually means progressing through the ‘strobist’ journey, learning off-camera flash with small speedlights before gradually realizing their limitations.

Your typical early setup might include three speedlights, a few lightweight stands, some white shoot-through umbrellas and maybe a snoot. It's compact, accessible and barely takes up any room. I definitely went through this phase, with additional radio transmitters and receivers back before they were built into flashes.

The trouble starts outdoors on a bright day. You're at full power with all three flashes zoomed into one umbrella – and it's still not enough to balance against the daylight.

Worse, you're shooting at f/22 just to keep your shutter speed below 1/250 sec – the dreaded sync speed. Go above that and the flash doesn't cover the whole frame. Bare flash almost cuts it, but it's not flattering and everything is in focus.

So you investigate higher-power lights and the modifiers to go with them. I went to the Elinchrom Quadra pack-and-head system – a 400Ws setup that I still have in boxes around the studio – but these are long out of vogue and there are far more options available now.

You discover high speed sync for creamy, shallow-focus portraits or start using neutral density filters to the same end. Both techniques eat into your power budget, pushing you into 400-600Ws territory. You need heavier light stands and, because you're still working on location, you need modifiers that pack down compactly.

So where does that leave things now?

I run two location setups: one very compact kit for indoors and a main system for most commercial jobs. Both are built around a three-light configuration: key light, fill / separation and background.

The compact kit started with three Godox V850II speedlights, but I've since moved to using two Godox AD100 Pros for more power in a smaller package. The key modifier here is the SMDV Flip 32, a wonderful octabox that opens in seconds, has a built-in stand adapter, and can be angled to suit your shot – similar in concept to the Profoto Clic system.

The stands are Manfrotto Nanos. A specific ring locks the AD100 in place on the Flip 32, though equivalent rings are available for V850-style speedlights. Depending on the shoot I might bring additional modifiers – a Godox snoot and a SmallRig FS30120 strip softbox (a 30x120cm box, hence the numbers!).

These are shared with the main system, mounted via Godox S2 brackets for Bowens-mount compatibility. The SmallRig in particular uses a quick setup and release system unlike anything else I've used. If I need additional light, I use one of the V850IIs I still have.

The main system is built around the Godox AD600BM (also sold as the rebranded Pixapro Citi600). These take Bowens modifiers directly and are more compact than the Elinchrom ELX 500s I use in the studio.

Alongside the FS30120 strips shared with the compact kit, I use the LA-90 Octa, which has a similar fast-assembly system. Stands are Neewer air-cushioned. Usually I travel with two lights, but I do have a third as backup, and sometimes I want a three-light setup (coupled with an additional FS30120.

I also use a version where I have the octa in front with an eye-lighter and a Lastolite (now Manfrotto) Hilite. Both systems are triggered by the Godox X3 – a compact touchscreen unit that handles the whole setup cleanly.

The weak point is transport. The main system currently splits across two Neewer bags – one for stands and umbrellas, one for lights and softboxes – which works for easy trunk storage but isn't ideal, no wheels for getting to the location from the car being the main issue.

The plan is to consolidate into a Think Tank Production Manager 40 rolling case, once I've confirmed the fit with the trunk of the car.

For a today version of this, you could reasonably use the AD100Pro II versions for the compact setup and the AD600Pro II for the main system – or even the AD400Pro II if you want a smaller size for about two-thirds lower power.

Best of all, you can use all the lights I’ve listed together, for those shots where you need more control or practicals on set. I’m not really sure I need eight lights on set, but you never know!

You might also like…

Take a look at the best flashguns and strobes along with the best photography lighting kits. And if you're not confident with flash, check out the best LED light panels.

I hate carrying things. I try to keep my photography kit as light and minimal as possible, but sometimes (well, a lot of the time) I need a tripod.

Travel tripods are usually an exercise in deciding which compromise will annoy me least. The lightest models can feel flimsy, the reassuringly solid ones are too heavy to carry all day, and the clever designs that balance both often come with a price that makes me reconsider whether I really need a tripod at all.

So when I got a chance to test the Heipi 3-in-1 W28S Travel Tripod, I jumped at it. A lightweight carbon fiber tripod with all the bells and whistles, but for half the price of Peak Design’s version – sounds great!

Its defining feature is the unusual three-pillar center column. Pull it out and it becomes a second, aluminum mini tripod, complete with adjustable leg angles and accessory threads.

The supplied low-profile ball head reveals a spring-loaded smartphone holder hidden beneath its Arca-type plate. And at 1.4kg, it is light enough to travel; it folds to 45cm long and just 7.5cm across, yet reaches 152cm and carries a quoted 20kg payload.

In our review, my colleague Matthew Richards called it “very good value for a tricked-up carbon fiber travel tripod,” and that is where the W28S really wins me over.

It costs $399 / £349, compared with $599 / £599 for Peak Design’s carbon fiber Travel Tripod and $900 / £800 for the newer Peak Design Pro Tripod. Peak Design’s models remain beautifully engineered and more polished, but the Heipi offers an enormous amount of functionality for considerably less.

It is not flawless. The 12 fliplocks on the legs are stiff and slower to open individually, while the 5-section legs taper to fairly spindly 14mm lower sections.

Our tests found some flex and vibration near maximum height, although Matthew still judged it “more sturdy and rigid than many travel tripods on the market.” The mini tripod can also flex when its legs are spread especially wide.

However, in my endless quest for something light enough to pack, solid enough to trust and more reasonably priced, the W28S balances all three better than almost anything else I have seen. My travel tripod search might finally be over.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best travel tripods and see how they compare to the best tripods for photography across all categories.

It’s happened: I’ve been duped by an AI-generated video. I knew this day would come, but I wasn't ready for it to be so soon. I feel afraid, scared, even violated – almost as though, like Morpheus rescuing Neo from The Matrix, I’ve been disconnected from a reality that never truly existed.

Fortunately my machine-generated nightmare only lasted a few moments, not a lifetime. Equally short but frightening is that AI video generation tools have only been around for a few years, yet humans are now capable of producing lifelike videos with them.

I’ve been saying for a while that AI tools are developing faster than most of us want to believe. But, at this rate, it won't be long before the machines completely take over.

As I watched the viral clip showing the behind-the-scenes of a disaster movie being filmed, the thought of it being AI never even entered my mind.

From the way in which the mini tsunami enveloped the model coastal palm trees and later collapsed the buildings further inland, there wasn’t a shadow of a doubt that this was a real video. I even got caught out by the people, something AI typically has trouble rendering accurately in videos.

ABOVE: now I've given it away, the video seem like AI from the start to you, but I was convinced…

But then I headed to the comments to find out more about the film – and here my reality came crashing down. Boom, right there in the second comment: “So, this is an AI video.” In disbelief I scrolled further to see if their claims were unfounded but, to my horror, the two frightful letters 'AI' cropped up again and again.

“This is it,” I told myself, after a moment of being dumbfounded, shocked, and then upset. “You’ve been hoodwinked by an AI-generated video for the first time.” No other AI video has ever seemed real enough to pull the veil over my eyes – something, as a photographer, I’ve prided myself on. But this was different, and I was oblivious.

So I watched again, this time hypervigilant, looking for the telltale signs of AI trickery. And there they were, subtly among the most realistic of frames.

On second watch, the camera dolly riding on rails seemed to move in an ever-so-jerky way. The production support crew running alongside the wave tank, it just didn't look right. Then the dead, but almost invisible, giveaway: a cameraman with two right arms.

But none of this mattered. It was too late; no amount of repenting could undo what had happened. The machine world had hooked me up to its meticulously programmed ruse before sucking me dry of all vitality and tossing me back into the real world (read that in Morpheus’ deep, shuddering voice).

Although, upon rewatching the video, I also read the description properly – and there, tucked away at the end, was an AI disclaimer. So, props to the creator for at least being transparent about their work (unlike the Architect, who purposely programmed the Matrix as an insidious illusion).

You might also like…

Here's our take on the best cameras for filmmaking. These 8K, 6K and 4K interchangeable-lens cameras that are built of moviemaking.

Robert Doisneau (1912-1994), the iconic 20th century French street photographer, is best known for his famous humanist approach to documenting everyday Parisian moments.

In later years, though, he’s arguably become just as well known for something he said to Australian photographer and photography historian Peter Adams in 1987.

Adams was interviewing Doisneau as part of a monumental 39-year pursuit to photograph the most famous living photographers from the past century, when the Frenchman said:

“You must let the person looking at the photograph go some way to finishing it. You should offer them a seed that will grow and open up their minds.”

But what did Doisneau mean by this, and how do you do this with your photos?

While certainly open to interpretation, I’m sure many of us would agree that the central idea the late street photographer was getting at was that a good photo doesn’t tell the beginning, middle and end of a scene.

It leaves a gap for the viewer to decide, in some way, how the narrative should unfold. A philosophy that the following image, taken fairly recently (and, fittingly, in Paris) by Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalist David Turnley, perfectly encapsulates.

At first, it may seem like the image tells the entire story. Inside the cafe, we see the subject: a woman with a coffee and a half-eaten pain au chocolat. And reflected in the window we see what she sees: a man riding by on a bicycle and the Parisian cityscape.

But it’s the woman’s pondering, perhaps concerned, expression that enables us to write the end of this script, despite the fact that Turnley gives us a complete understanding of her surroundings.

What is she thinking? Is she concerned or is she just in deep thought? Maybe she’s simply posing, hoping that Turnley captures her best angle.

To me, it’s this. I don’t know the story behind the image, but the way the woman eloquently rests her head on her clasped hands makes me think she noticed the camera in time to position herself.

Interestingly Doisneau himself didn’t always follow his own philosophy, so well-embodied by Turnley’s frame. Ironically, his most famous shot – a staged scene called Kiss by the Hôtel de Ville – doesn’t leave much to the imagination, at least not in my view.

Although maybe this is just as important a takeaway: that a philosophy should guide your photography, not be a strict rule to follow at all times.

But the idea of planting a seed in the mind of the viewer for them to sow into an idea was certainly of utmost importance to Doisneau – who, in much of his work, found ways to infuse intrigue, mystery, and imagination into everyday scenes of life on Paris’ streets.

You might also like…

Check out the best cameras for street photography and the best lenses for street photography. Take a look at this 2026 award-winning photo which encapsulates legendary French street photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson's principle of the decisive moment.

August 2026 is one of the most event-packed months of the year for astrophotographers — and perhaps the busiest for years. On August 12, it not only delivers a rare total solar eclipse across parts of the Northern Hemisphere, but also a partial solar eclipse that’s deep across Europe and shallow in parts of North America. Just hours later, overnight on 12-13 August, comes the peak of the Perseid meteor shower, the best display of “shooting stars” in 2026. Add Venus, which in mid-month begins to shrink to a crescent as it approaches Earth — getting brighter as it does — and a partial lunar eclipse late in the month, and August becomes a showcase of multiple types of astronomical targets.

Here’s everything you need to know about astrophotography in August 2026:

Read: 10 must-shoot events for astrophotographers in 2026

Wednesday, August 12: Total solar eclipse

The standout astrophotography event of 2026 is a total solar eclipse that sweeps across eastern Greenland, western Iceland and northern Spain. For those within the 180-mile-wide path of totality, this is a rare opportunity to photograph one of nature’s most dramatic spectacles.

Outside the path, a deep partial solar eclipse will be seen shortly before sunset across Europe. In North America, northeastern U.S. states and Canada will see a small eclipse in mid-afternoon.

Preparation is everything. You must use a solar filter for all partial phases, removing it only during totality itself if you’re in the path. A focal length of 400-800mm will capture the sun’s corona in detail, though wider lenses can be used for landscape compositions showing the darkened sky and horizon glow. Exposure bracketing is critical, as the corona spans a huge range of brightness. Practise beforehand — this is not an event to improvise.

Read: Start planning for the next solar eclipse – the must-photograph astro event of 2026

August 12-13: Perseid meteor shower

The Perseids peak on the night after the eclipse — a coincidence that effectively guarantees a moonless night sky perfect for meteor photography. Under dark skies, rates can reach 80–100 meteors per hour. As always with attempts to capture fleeting meteors, the best strategy is “set and forget.” Use a wide-angle lens (14-24mm), a fast aperture (f/2-f/2.8), ISO 800-1600 and exposures of 20-30 seconds. Meteors can appear anywhere in the sky. Shoot continuously for several hours, and you’ve got a great chance of catching a few streaking through a frame.

Read: How to photograph the stunning Perseid meteor shower

August 15: Dark sky window

The last quarter moon — rising late at night — on August 6 kicks off a dark-sky period ideal for deep-sky imaging. With no moonlight to interfere, this is one of the final opportunities of the year to photograph the Milky Way’s core in the evening sky.

Look south after dark to capture the dense star clouds and dust lanes of the Milky Way flowing through the vast Summer Triangle asterism. Use a wide-angle lens and exposures of 10-20 seconds at ISO 800-3200, taking care to keep stars sharp. For greater detail, use a star tracker to extend exposure times. This is also a good time to experiment with panoramas or vertical compositions — but also think about composition, making sure there’s more in your image than just the Milky Way.

Read: The best star tracker camera mounts

August 15: Venus at greatest elongation

Venus reaches its greatest eastern elongation, shining brilliantly in the western sky after sunset. At nearly 48 degrees from the sun, it will be prominent as the “Evening Star.” It also becomes an ideal target for a close-up because it is now half-lit (as an inner planet, it has phases like the moon) and is becoming more of a crescent each night, even as its disk grows larger as it gets closer to Earth. This kind of image demands a refractor or Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope — ideally with a high focal length of about 1,000mm — and high magnification. Because of its brightness, Venus can be captured even before the sky fully darkens, allowing for more creative foreground work.

Read: The best cameras for astrophotography

August 27-28: Partial lunar eclipse

A solar eclipse also comes with a lunar eclipse in tow — sometimes before, sometimes after. This deep partial lunar eclipse will see 96% of the full moon enter Earth’s shadow, with cameras capturing a rusty, reddish color on the lunar surface near the peak. North and South America will get the best views, while Europe will see the peak of the eclipse in the hours before sunrise. A telephoto lens (300-600mm) will reveal detail, while shorter focal lengths can be used for creative compositions. Unlike a total lunar eclipse, part of the moon will remain brightly lit, so exposure balancing is important. Shoot in RAW and bracket exposures to retain both the shadowed and illuminated regions.

Read: How to photograph the Blood Moon

Astrophotography shot of the month: Milky Way and Perseids under a dark sky

While the total solar eclipse is the headline event, the Perseid meteor shower offers the most accessible and repeatable opportunity for astrophotographers. With a new moon ensuring dark skies, this year’s display is perfectly timed not only to catch meteors, but to do so with the Milky Way in the background. Find a location far from light pollution, point the camera south and use continuous shooting to keep it running for hours. The more frames you capture, the higher your chances of recording multiple meteors. However, always add a foreground element — a tree, a building or a landscape feature — to create interest, scouting a location in daylight if you can.

Read more:

• Astrophotography tools: the best camera, lenses and gear

• The best lenses for astrophotography

• The best star tracker camera mounts

I am never surprised to see that the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR is trending on Google. From the moment this formidable Nikon Z lens was launched back in 2023, it’s been a hugely popular optic for Nikon.

Indeed its spiritual forebear, the Nikon AF‑S 200‑500mm f/5.6E ED VR, is still a fixture in both hides and trackside the world over.

A fantastic performer that stops short of pro-level prices

The Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR sits firmly within the enthusiast bracket, but I’ve known pros to favor its blend of reach, affordability and relatively light weight, too.

Essentially, it’s a middle ground between lenses like the Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD ($699 / £699 / AU$1,199) and the Nikon Z 28‑400mm f/4‑8 VR ($1,449 / £1,399 / AU$2,299), and serious pro-grade optics that arguably begin with the Nikon Z 100‑400mm f/4.5‑5.6 VR S ($2,949 / £2,699 / AU$4,799) and ends with the Nikon Z 600mm f/4 TC VR S ($16,199 / £15,499 / AU$28,299).

The Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR is priced at $2,199 / £1,999 / AU$3,099, placing it firmly in the middle. However, it’s important to remember that this is an extremely long lens.

The Big N doesn’t make many 600mm optics and the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR is the cheapest of the bunch. It might not be the fastest lens in the world, but it’s still very workable in a variety of situations – especially given the enhanced low-light capabilities of the best Nikon cameras and the industry-rocking power of AI noise reduction.

I get it, 2,000 bucks is a lot of anyone’s money and it’s beyond the reach of some creatives. But for sports and wildlife photographers, having a long lens like the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR in their arsenal is quite simply more important than the camera.

A lot of enthusiasts have no problem dropping big bucks on a body or two (or three), but shy away from investing in the optics they need to fulfill their creative ambition.

If you can’t afford the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR but have a Z-Series camera, my recommendation would be to pair a secondhand F-mount lens – such as the Nikon AF‑S 200‑500mm f/5.6E ED VR – with the Nikon FTZ adapter.

Right now, MPB is selling said lens from £589 / $849, but there is a wealth of long lenses on the used market that you can find for less.

Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR: How does it fare in 2026?

The Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR is a lovely lens to shoot with, delivering gorgeous image quality and a slick, internal zoom design.

But while the internal zoom does provide a more premium feel, it does mean that this lens will take up plenty of space in your kit bag. So much so that even a standard bag may struggle to accommodate this lens while it’s attached to a camera.

You get 5.5 stops of Vibration Reduction (Nikon’s proprietary optical stabilization) and customizable function buttons, as well as some decent weather sealing. It doesn’t boast the greatest tripod collar and foot, though, with the latter being rather small and uncomfortable when used as a handle, but this is easily replaced if it bothers you enough (I’ve kept mine).

And while the f/5.6-6.3 aperture range might seem a bit slow, with some cunning subject positioning it’s not hard to blur the background – especially as you’ll likely spend most of your time at the telephoto end anyway.

Overall, the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR represents just as good value and delivers just as good a performance three years after its release. I’d recommend it to anyone.

You might also like...

Two years with the Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR: Still a wildlife or sports enthusiast’s dream lens. I chose the Nikon Z 180-600mm for its value and reach, but my chiropractor would recommend the Z 100-400mm. And here are the best lenses for bird photography.