Inbox

YOUR LETTERS

LETTER OF THE WEEK W NS A SAMSUNG EVO PLUS M CROSD CARD. NOTE: PR ZE APPL ES TO UK AND EU RESIDENTS ONLY Contact Amateur Photographer, TI Media Limited, Pinehurst 2, Pinehurst Road, Farnborough, Hampshire GU14 7BF Email ap@ti-media.com Subscriptions Enquiries and orders email help@magazinesdirect.com Telephone 0330 333 1113 Overseas +44 330 1113 (lines open Mon-Fri GMT 8.30am-5.30pm excluding bank holidays) One year (51 issues) UK £155.50; Europe e 259; USA $338.99; Rest of World £221.99 Test Reports Contact OTC for copies of AP test reports. Telephone 01707 273 773 Back Issues Contact 01795 662976; support@mags-uk.com Advertising Email samuel.shaw@ti-media.com Inserts Call Mona Amarasakera, Canopy Media, on 0203 148 3710 Editorial team Group Editor Nigel Atherton Deputy Editor Geoff Harris Technical Editor Andy Westlake Reviews Editor Michael Topham Features Editor Amy Davies Technique Editor Hollie Latham Hucker Production Editor Jacqueline Porter Chief Sub Editor/Features Jolene Menezes Acting Chief Sub/Features Amanda Stroud Art Editor Sarah Foster Senior Designer Steph Tebboth Studio Manager Andrew Sydenham Photo-Science Consultant Professor Robert Newman Offi ce Manager Hollie Bishop Special thanks to The moderators of the AP website: Andrew Robertson, lisadb, Nick Roberts, The Fat Controller Advertising Head of Market Liz Reid 07949 179 200 Senior Account Manager Samuel Shaw 07970 615 618 Production Coordinator Chris Gozzett 0203 148 2694 Publishing team Chief Executive Offi cer Marcus Rich Group Managing Director Adrian Hughes Managing Director Kirsty Setchell Printed by Walstead UK Limited Distributed by Marketforce 5 Churchill Place, London E14 Telephone 0203 787 9001

Editorial Complaints We work hard to achieve the highest standards of editorial content, and we are committed to complying with the Editors’ Code of Practice (www.ipso.co.uk/ IPSO/cop.html) as enforced by IPSO. If you have a complaint about our editorial content, you can email us at complaints@ti media.com or write to Complaints Manager, TI Media Limited Legal Department, 161 Marsh Wall, London E14 9AP. Please provide details of the material you are complaining about and explain your complaint by reference to the Editors’ Code. We will endeavour to acknowledge your complaint within 5 working days, and we aim to correct substantial errors as soon as possible. All contributions to Amateur Photographer must be original, not copies or duplicated to other publications. The editor reserves the right to shorten or modify any letter or material submitted. TI Media Limited or its associated companies reserves the right to re use any submission sent to the letters column of Amateur Photographer magazine, in any format or medium, WHETHER PRINTED, ELECTRONIC OR OTHERWISE Amateur Photographer® is a registered trademark of TI Media Limited © TI Media Limited 2020 Amateur Photographer (incorporating Photo Technique, Camera Weekly & What Digital Camera) Email: amateurphotographer@ ti media.com Website: www.amateurphotographer.co.uk. TI Media Limited switchboard tel: 0203 148 5000 Amateur Photographer is published weekly (51 issues per year) on the Tuesday preceding the cover date by TI Media Limited, 161 Marsh Wall, London E14 9AP. Distributed by Marketforce (UK) Ltd, 5 Churchill Place, London E14. ISSN 0002 6840. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval or transmitted in any format or medium, whether printed, electronic or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher or the editor. This is considered a breach of copyright and action will be taken where this occurs. This magazine must not be lent, sold, hired or otherwise disposed of in a mutilated condition or in any authorised cover by way, or by trade, or annexed to any publication or advertising matter without fi rst obtaining written permission from the publisher. TI Media Limited does not accept responsibility for loss or damage to unsolicited photographs and manuscripts, and product samples. TI Media Limited reserves the right to use any submissions sent to Amateur Photographer Magazine in any format or medium, including electronic. One year subscription (51 issues) £155.50 (UK), e 259 (Europe), $338.99 (USA), £221.99 (rest of world). The 2015 US annual DEU subscription price is $338.99, airfreight and mailing in the USA by named Air Business Ltd, c/o Worldnet Shipping Inc, 156 15, 146th Avenue, 2nd fl oor, Jamaica, NY 11434, USA. Periodicals postage paid at Jamaica NY 11431. US Postmaster: Send address changes to Amateur Photographer, Air Business Ltd, c/o Worldnet Shipping Inc, 156 15, 146th Avenue, 2nd fl oor, Jamaica, NY 11434, USA. Subscriptions records are maintained at TI Media Limited, 161 Marsh Wall, London E14 9AP. Air Business Ltd is acting as our mailing agent.

Email ap@ti-media.com and include your full postal address. Write to Inbox, Amateur Photographer, TI Media Limited, Pinehurst 2, Pinehurst Road, Farnborough Business Park, Farnborough, Hants GU14 7BF

LETTER OF THE WEEK

APS-C bridge

AS AN enthusiastic user of bridge cameras over the years, I totally agree with John Gordon’s view in his letter ‘Bridge of size’ ( Inbox, 4 January). And following his line of thought, I would like to suggest that the following is feasible and could prove very popular: a ‘bridge camera’ with a lesser zoom (say, 28mm to 200mm, even 150mm) to keep size down, but with an APS-C sensor. Personally, I have become more interested in image quality and low light performance than several hundred mm of zoom. I’m currently using a Sony Alpha 7R Mark II with the tiny Samyang prime 24mm, and I do my zooming on the computer! But if someone introduced an APS-C bridge camera of similar size and weight to my current set-up, I would be David is an enthusiastic user of bridge cameras but not so keen on changing lenses

very interested. Is this not possible? Even a more limited zoom range, say 28mm to 120mm, would be attractive. Even 35mm to 100mm! As you can tell, I hate changing lenses. Is what I am suggesting not technically possible? I fi nd that unlikely. David Boothroyd

Win! A Samsung 64GB EVO Plus microSDXC with SD adapter Class 10 UHS-1 Grade U3 memory card supports 4K UHD. Offering R/W speeds of up to 100MB/s /60MB/s and a 10-year limited warranty. www.samsung.com/uk/memory-cards.

Adobe betrayal I refer to the letter from Gerald Peppiatt ( Inbox, 18 January) regarding Adobe Lightroom not running under Adobe OSX 10.14.6 Mojave. A problem that began with the release of OSX 10.13 High Sierra in September 2017. I use a 2009 iMac and have been a Lightroom user since it was fi rst released in 2007. I have progressively updated to the latest version until Lightroom 5. When Lightroom 6 was released I had retired due to ill health and my fi nancial circumstances no longer allowed me the luxury of purchasing new software applications. Lightroom 6 was not available as a free upgrade, but had to be purchased with a new license. I continued to use Lightroom 5 very happily until Adobe released OSX 10.13 High Sierra. Once I had installed High Sierra, Lightroom 5 stopped working. It would crash immediately after launch or soon after. Apple made no mention of this and did not warn users of this problem in the High Sierra release notes. As far as Apple was concerned, it was not its problem, it was an Adobe problem. Adobe’s response to my complaint was to the effect that Lightroom versions 5 and 6, and all previous versions, were no longer supported and that I should purchase a subscription to Lightroom CC. I was only one of thousands of Lightroom users who had the same problem. The Adobe forums were inundated with posts on the subject. No solution has ever been offered by Adobe. I am sure that a simple patch could have been made available by Adobe without ruining some vast eternal plan. I now feel betrayed by both Adobe, of whom I was a loyal customer for many years, and by Apple. My only alternative if I wish to continue using Lightroom in my circumstances is to either purchase the Adobe subscription service, which I am not in a position to do, or to replace Lightroom with an alternative application such as ON1. My current iMac still runs very well and diagnostics do not indicate any hard drive problems yet. When it fails, I will no longer have the ability to access my catalogue of 50,000 images created over a period of 65 years. Most of my fi nal edited images have been exported as either tiff or highresolution JPEG fi les and are backed up on external drives. These will become assets of my estate on my passing. I still enjoy my photography and get out with my camera as often as possible, so new material is still being created and downloaded to my computer. My use of Adobe products for post production, however, has come to an involuntary bitter end. I feel that it has been very unfair of Adobe not to recognise the fact that there are Lightroom 5 and 6 users who, due to personal circumstances, cannot fi nance a subscription to Lightroom CC or to Adobe Creative Cloud, either due to fi nancial constraints or to administrative restrictions. These users paid Adobe good money when they made their initial purchase of their Adobe software and deserve better treatment than that which they have received. Graham Serretta

fi lter thread. A good fi rst camera for a youngster. Bill Houlder

The mystery screw on the front of the Leica M10 Monochrom

Annoying screw When reading Andy Westlake’s review of the Leica M10 Monochrom (AP, 22 February), I found my eyes being continually drawn towards that large single screw head on the front of the camera body, directly above the lens mount, and the reason why my eyes were drawn to it is because it was squint. The engineer in me says that the slot in a screw head like that should either be horizontal (preferably) or vertical, but never squint. If I owned this camera, I would be sorely tempted to take a screwdriver and try and square it up to make it look better, which I am sure would horrify a Leica engineer. I imagine that there is a valid reason why the slot is squint, or indeed why an ugly visible screw head is there in the fi rst place. I would love to know. D Thomson

This is the cover for the rangefi nder’s alignment mechanism. It simply does up until it’s tight. Lining up the slot either vertically or horizontally would mean unscrewing it slightly, which would risk it working loose and getting lost. On previous M models the screw has been covered up by the Leica dot, which probably explains why Leica hasn’t engineered the cover so the slot ends up vertical or horizontal.

Phones for Hugh I know some readers may question why you test phone cameras but we all carry a phone these days and use them for snaps, so who wouldn’t want to know which one has the best camera? My only criticism is you only tested top-ofthe-range models. I’d love to know how the more affordable offerings fare. Hugh Potter

Mystery camera I believe that the mystery camera on the cover of your Christmas 1965 cover ( Inbox, 8 Feb) is a Yashica rangefi nder. Probably an MG1 with 40mm f/2.8 lens. Yashica made thousands of 35mm fi xed-lens rangefi nder cameras. Many were selenium metered. Later ones had CdS metering. Most had parallax correction, as my Yashica Minister III has. Sadly many passed through the hands of idiots who displayed them in their shop windows where the meter cells were degraded by being left in strong light. My Minister was one such. Fortunately having an uncoupled meter they can be used with handheld meters. Most have self-timers, although many have failed due to lack of use. And there’s a

The mystery camera on AP’s cover from Christmas 1975 I think the camera is a Werra. If I am correct, it was a sturdy machine with an unusual method of cocking the shutter. It was made in Germany but I am unsure whether the factory was in the East or the West. The Werra felt good in the hand and was tempting but I was already committed to Nikon. Michael Kaye

Manual labour Don Goodman ( Inbox, 8 February) provided contact details of a company selling printed copies of manuals for ‘every camera and iPhone’. A quick online search identifi ed several such companies. I can understand manufacturers’ reluctance to provide full reference manuals for every product –including a manual would clearly add to the transportation costs. I would like to add a word of caution. Looking at my downloaded manuals for my DSLRs they stress that ‘no reproduction in any form of this manual, in whole or in part (except for brief quotation in critical articles or reviews), may be made without written authorisation’. I’m uncertain what the position is about these printed manuals, whether the end user, or the company that printed and sold them, is liable if the manufacturer decides to take action. Jonathan Smith

It’s inconceivable that a company would take legal action against someone for printing an instruction manual that is only supplied as a pdf, and thus making it easier for its customers to understand how to use its products. Imagine the fl ak it would get! But if it did, it would be the supplier of the manuals, not the end user, who would be in trouble.

Back in the day

A wander through the AP archive. This week we pay a visit to March 1934

1934

ONE OF the most popular recurring themes on AP covers of the mid 1930s was hand colouring, usually with a single spot colour, and this issue is typical of the period. Among the Topics of the Week under discussion is the philosophical question ‘Why do we take photographs?’ It was posed to a group of pictorialists by the evocatively named Major PC Bull, who sounds like the kind of man who says ‘poppycock’ a lot. He explained that photography is ‘merely a way of keeping ourselves out of mischief in our spare time’. Furthermore, the correspondent reported, ‘Major Bull’s answer to his own question is that he takes photographs because he jolly well wants to.’ (He didn’t actually say ‘jolly well’ but you can hear it in the tone). Photographs are not art, he insists. ‘We have no business to make them unlike photographs, and if we do feel a little thrill of pleasure when someone says of our work, “There, now, who would think it was a photograph” we must know that is of the devil.’ It was not recorded whether anyone in the room was brave enough to disagree with him.