Latest Posts

AI cuts reflections in glasses

This is a follow-up to our last post about PortraitPro. Using a self-portrait taken for the purpose with bad reflections in uncoated reading specs, I went through the options of the reflection removal process. Mid-May a 15% discount was authorised for code CC524 at www.anthropics.com which applies to all 50% discounted program downloads.

It was taken on the Sony A7IV with 85mm f/1.8, tripod, ISO 400, lens at to f/8 and control through iPhone 15 Pro Max using Sony Creators’ App remote viewing and control. The screen on the A7IV was vertical and facing me, so I could also look at the camera and see the reflections move as I changed my head angle. Setting this up showed me some problems with the A7IV articulated screen design I had not realised – it can only face the self-portrait subject when folded out at the left-hand end of the camera, which with a Arca-Swiss L-plate means hanging down… obscured by the tripod head! So no L-plate but standard Arca small plate, and camera upside down compared to normal hand holding.

This is the result using PortraitPro V24. Read on to learn more, and don’t forget if you decide to get this program use Cameracraft’s additional 10% discount code, CCV245.

PortraitPro has come a long way in a few years. At the top end, the Studio Max version is a £308 program which costs £154 with the 50% download discount that Anthropics have offered ever since the days of CDs in packaging. Since no-one now buys a CD, the real price is £154 (with 10% off for Cameracraft’s code, CV245 in the latest May/June issue).

You may not need Studio Max with its 48-bit file capability, workflow from raw to exported finals, multiple image batch processing intended to auto retouch complete portrait sessions, handling of wedding groups and granular control fine-tuning its effects. The basic V24 includes this function and costs £99 less 50% download only less our 10% – so £44.55.

It is now very fast indeed on Apple Silicon and integrates with Adobe’s photo programs. Under the hood it uses some of Adobe’s functions, without venturing into Generative Fill AI to change a digital capture beyond the scope of many competitions. It uses AI, but does not rely on on stolen images or ones licensed for almost nothing in bulk from the big picture libraries. Anthropics built their platform on measurements of the human face and body, research into what people like or dislike, and many years of coding. When it uses image-based AI it draws that from your photo and its bank of facial features modelling data.

The Reflections in Glasses problem

Recently we came across a question in a professional photo organisation Facebook group asking how it was possible to remove reflections from glasses. It’s very difficult, and when it happens in a set of pictures where the photographer is unable to prevent it, it can ruin groups and presentation shots. Many battery studio-location flash heads now have very low power modelling and it’s all too easy to light your subject and fail to spot that your octa-box is reflecting in specs.

PortraitPro’s specimen example might just be good luck, so I decided to test Version 24. My studio room has shutters when blackout is needed. Two pure white plain blinds 110 x 220cm cover the tall south facing windows to prevent furniture, fabrics, art and photographs fading or warping in direct heat. They make a wonderful giant dual light source in daytime sun even in midwinter but reflect in glasses when the camera angle is not just right.

Removing reflections from specs does not come under the Eye menu – it’s under the “Inpainting menu” along with Mouth & Teeth and Remove Stray Hairs.

This is a crop from the original file.

The Reduce Reflections in Glasses view above shows other retouching functions too (notice some reductions in skin blemishes and wrinkles) but has the reflections reduction set to Off. When you select Remove Reflections in Glasses, you see choices for Off (the start position) then Options 1 to 5. Each is a different AI generated restructuring of what should be visible through the reduced reflection. My eyes are old enough to be slightly difficult and it was interesting to see the five choices.

Option 1

Option 2 (note the left eye eyelid in all these and how it changes).

Option 3 which I felt got the eye almost right, though further retouching would be needed for a portrait. It would be good enough for a PR or informal shot.

Option 4 rather odd mismatched detail.

Option 5 eyelid droop…

Option 3 got the upper eyelid almost perfect (not quite but acceptable) and the Strength slider did allow the reflection to be eliminated to the degree shown above. However, it looked better with 85% effect or even the 50% of the earlier example, a faint reflection remaining without obscuring the eye.

The time taken on my Mac M2 Studio Max was next to nothing, I didn’t bother to time it as everything happens in real time include the export from the starting 33MP JPEG to a same size with all PortraitPro’s very subtle modification of the portrait. The defaults were just right but I increased fine wrinkle reduction out of vanity!

After saving a copy of processed result I also saved a .ppx file (the Project) which is a bit like an Adobe .XML sidecar file, and re-opens your original with all the edits at the point you saved this snapshot, reversible and adjustable as needed.

A tougher test

Here’s a worse example than anything you should end up with, so I set maximum strength on this. Option 4 worked best, and despite my eyes being almost entirely obscured by double reflections in my computer reading specs, it was not a bad fix at all. My ‘proper’ specs are coated of course and don’t reflect as badly.

I’m sure I could ask Adobe AI to do something the Generative Fill after masking the reflection area, but in the time it would take me to brush a mask in place, the entire PortraitPro glasses reflection removal would be done and dusted. Is it worth £139 (after our code CCV245 discount)? That depends on what your time is valued at and whether you ever encounter an error in shooting which leaves reflections ruining a shot.

– David Kilpatrick

To see Anthropics PortraitPro Studio Max, and the other versions which start from £49.95 (right now there’s a 15% CC524 discount, update May 23rd 2024) – all include this reflection removal function alongside stacks of other tools – go to https://www.anthropics.com/portraitpro/

AI makes latest PortraitPro deal worth having

We’ve been testing, reviewing and occasionally using this software for years now – occasionally because portraits are not mainstream for your editor, most faces are in editorial contexts where no modification is acceptable (even when it’s just a royal jumper). But for those who must keep family or paying clients happy, in this era of completely modified selfies and altered perceptions of what a portrait should be, the latest AI version has real value.

You can get maximum download discount of 50% plus an extra 10% by using Cameracraft‘s code CCV245

If badly out of focus faces within a group can be recovered, reflections removed from glasses, and smiles improved without the £10k my dentist suggests is necessary to replace teeth you can’t even see… take a look at this full info. – David Kilpatrick

  • Key New Features
  • Mouth Inpainting & Teeth Replacer
  • Glasses Reflection Remover
  • Face Recovery
  • Skin and Hair masks
  • Improved workflow
  • New gender and age detector

This is Face Recovery, though the lass has become a bit long in the tooth – the AI teeth are more realistic than any amount of focus retrieval and sharpening plus retouching could achieve in a few minutes.

This is Mouth Inpainting.

And this is Glasses Reflection removal, which again is a task not to be relished in Photoshop, and the top end version of PortraitPro (Studio Max) can handle in groups, in a series of shots where it’s having a similar effect.

This pair shows a cumulative but very subtle effect from the improved workflow, and it clearly compensates for failings in the colour management and lighting. It’s impressive to note that PortraitPro started life being a very obvious process, and our advice was always to turn the default sliders down rather than up. It has matured considerably. The new workflow has improved gender and age detection, and Studio Max is well-tuned to Apple Silicon to make optimum use of CPU, GPU and RAM.

PortraitPro 24 Editions

PortraitPro Standard is standalone software for photographers working with JPG or 24-bit TIFF files.

PortraitPro Studio is for photographers who work directly with RAW files or want the higher quality of 48-bit colour files, supports conversion between different color spaces, and provides JPEG/TIFF embedded color profile support. Offers Batch Dialog.  

PortraitPro Studio Max For professional photographers or those working with a large number of images. Full Batch Mode to speed workflow greatly.

Compare the different editions: anthropics.com/portraitpro/editions

Availability and Pricing

PortraitPro 24 editions are available from: anthropics.com/portraitpro

Remember to use Cameracraft’s code CCV245 for maximum discount! This can also be used for PortraitPro Body, Landscape Pro and the user-recipe Smart Photo Editor.

Download the latest Cameracraft FREE

It is now over a month since Cameracraft September/October 2023 went out to printed edition subscribers and was released in the App and Pocketmags, and to our digital-only subscribers who received the link to download in a September 1st email.

With main features previewing the season we are now most definitely in – Autumn or Fall – it’s only fair to let the world see the issue with the informative New England Fall article by Jeff Folger, and the introduction to wonderful Welsh waterfalls at this time of year from Jon Rees. And as usual it’s an edition with plenty to read as well as great photography. Please subscribe to our worldwide digital delivery £15 a year to get future issues on the day they are published, or choose the printed edition sent out by mail at the same time. Just click on the cover for the download link to read this edition free!

Sony release A7C upgrades to II and R versions, new 16-35mm GM

Sony has announced the launch of its two new Alpha 7C compact full frame cameras, and version II of the ƒ2.8 wide-angle G-master 16-35mm zoom. But the cameras do look good with the 50mm f/1.2 G Master – a bit of a classic photojournalist’s combo.

Alpha 7C II key features: 

  • Full-frame back-illuminated Exmor R® CMOS sensor similar to A7IV, with approximately 33.0 effective megapixels
  • ISO sensitivity from 100 to 51200 for both still images and movies (expanded ISO 50 to 204800 for still images)
  • Same AI-processing unit as the A7R V

Alpha 7C R key features

  • Full frame image sensor with approximately 61.0 effective megapixels similar to A7RIV, IVa and V
  • Same AI-processing unit as the A7R V

Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II key features: 

  • World’s smallest and lightest high-resolution f2.8 wide-angle zoom lens 
  • Fast and precise AF that brings out the best in advanced bodies 

The new products will be available to purchase from September 2023 at a variety of Sony’ authorised dealers throughout Europe, for an estimated retail price of: 

  • Alpha 7C R: £3,200 / €3,732
  • Alpha 7C II: £2,100 / €2,449
  • FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II: £2,400/ €2,799

Our comments before handling and using these: first of all, they are welcome and affordable specifications though the full A7 body is better ergonomically and in controls. The A7CR has seven-stop Steady Shot Inside as does the II, but also Pixel Shift Multi Shooting, something unexpected in the smaller body. Having said this, these bodies have only a single SDXC UHS-II card slot and both feature the same small (0.70X with 50mm) 2.35 million pixel OLED EVFs – far lower resolution, less tolerant eyepoint and apparently smaller size compared to the mainstream A7IV/RIV+ models. If the eyepiece (ocular) glass design is similar to the A7C, it’s also likely to be zonally unsharp and demand very accurate centering of the eye.

Sony’s current emphasis on video and vlogging, fortunately not emphasised in the press info which major instead on the travel friendly aspect of these bodies for still shooting, does mean they have microphone and headphone jack sockets as well as the audio functions found in the Multi Interface shoe.

As for the 16-35mm GM II, it may be the claimed smallest and lightest but taking 82mm filters makes it about as kit-friendly as any larger lens if you use a filter system, and even screw-in filters like a convenient polariser end up taking loads of space in typical 82mm size packaging or keepers. Perhaps a 16-35mm f/4 G or even GM series II might be on the way. Maybe the qualification of the claim with the words ‘high resolution’ is s clue – there may be smaller and lighter competitors which Sony believes they can prove to be lower in resolution, and they must have tested every single one of them to make this claim! The A7C II body is offered as a kit with the 28-60mm collapsible lens, slow but useful for travel – the A7CR does not come as a kit, perhaps an indicator of Sony’s own view about using this budget lens on 61 megapixels.

Nikon 70-180mm f/2.8 is 2X converter compatible

What does this mean? Well, it means that unless Tamron – the undoubted OEM of this lens just as they are the OEM of the Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 – have redesigned the lens to differ in the rear mount baffles and design from their 70-180mm for Sony E-mount, a 2X converter for the Sony SHOULD be possible despite Sony’s long-standing ban on any third party 2X.

Here is the Sony rear mount.

Below is the Nikon Z-TC2 converter, which has an unusually slim intruding optical tube.

The Nikon Z mount has a register (back focus) of 16mm compared to Sony’s 18mm, which is a fairly neutral aspect as there is more room for the length of a converter barrel, but with the optical design of the Tamron and Nikon counterparts being identical the Sony rear group is 2mm closer to the bayonet mount. This should not affect how a suitably sized optical tube could be positioned.

Sony’s mount is however very much smaller in diameter than Nikon Z, a mere 46.1mm compared to 55mm. That’s nearly 9mm. so looking at the Sony rear mount photo and comparing it with the Nikon can be deceptive. That optical tube is 29mm is diameter, and the rear baffle in the Tamron E-mount would limit any intruding tube to 22mm. However, a modified Tamron E-mount with its rectangular baffle replaced (perhaps a Mark 2?) could have enough clearance with provision for the contact bezel .

We should not forget that Tamron invented the modern teleconverter with the Twin Tamron 135mm f/4.5/225mm f/7.7 (not a 2X, but a 1.7X) launched in 1958 – the lens which pretty much started Tamron’s journey to where they are now.

– David Kilpatrick

Sony 20-70mm f/4 G – a new type of lens

The 20-70mm f4 Sony G looks interesting though the UK price of £1400 is a bit over the top (under $1100 in the USA) – maybe allowing for further losses pounds vs dollar. It’s over twice the price of the Panasonic 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 – maybe not comparable but the Lumix lens is regularly discounted by 25% or more, and partly due to being sold as a kit lens with full frame body some white box new lenses have been at 40-50% discount. It’s unlikely the Sony will be bundled as a kit lens. Even at the UK price, it looks attractive for anyone like me who might consider working with just a two-kens kit, this and the 70-300mm G. At the moment I use 17-28mm and 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron lenses to cover the practical range this one lens almost manages, though there’s a fair gap between 17mm and 20mm.



In the specification there’s one oddity – the stated minimum focus distance and magnifications. Most wide to portrait zooms focus closer at the wide angle end. Apparently this one does the reverse, and the 0.39X close-up image scale is based on 25cm at 70mm (it’s a mystery why the specs bother to say AF and MF distances, when there’s no difference – 25cm either way!). Here’s from the spec:

MINIMUM FOCUS DISTANCEWide: 0.30 m / Tele: 0.25 m (AF), 0.25 m (MF) (Wide: 0.99 ft / Tele: 0.82 ft (AF), 0.82 ft (MF))MAXIMUM MAGNIFICATION RATIO (X)0.39

Well, 30cm at 20mm focal length is just OK; my yardstick for min focus is that I like to see it just less than 10X focal length, so for an 85mm lens I want to get 0.85m if possible, like having anything closer and don’t like ones which only manage 1m. With a 20mm focal length 20cm close focus is desirable. The Tamron 17-28mm as an example manages 19cm at 17mm, it’s just OK, but can’t shoot any real close-ups as the largest c/u scale in 1:5.2 or 0.19X. The Sony 20-70mm manages 1:2.56, getting on for half life size, by focusing closer at 70mm than it does at 20mm.

This is such an unusual overall mix of zoom/focus behaviours that I really do want to try this lens and understand how.

The other unusual statement about the lens is that the zoom and focus design minimises breathing (desirable) and axial shift – well, I’ve not seen a zoom with axial shift, image wandering off centre when you zoom or focus, since the days of pioneering 1970s consumer glassware. Especially not a non-stabilised zoom, like this. Stabilisation has been the main reason any lens shifts off axis.

The lens weighs 488g which is great, takes 72mm filters which is not great but matches some other Sony lenses, and the size as you can see from the images here is convenient though not a single PR image sent to me shows it with a lens hood which could have some impact on bag/pocket ability. One thing’s for sure, if the dual linear motor focusing is as good as claimed, f/4 will not be a big loss over f/2.8 and carrying one lens in place of two will make this a winner for travel, landscape and urban shooting. It’s due to be in UK stores from March 3rd.

– David Kilpatrick

Tamron’s 150-500mm in practice on the Fujifilm X system

Charles Brooker writes about his experience with theTamron 150-500 vs Fujifilm 100-400 (with 1.4x Teleconverter)

My photographic journey hasn’t seen much need for me to compare lenses especially with the Fujifilm ecosystem being pretty lacking in competition. I had lusted after the Fujifilm 100-400 for a long while and eventually took the plunge about a year ago. Since then I have probably put it to use in over 50,000 images across wildlife, sport and occasionally cityscapes. When I got it I adored it. It was the single most expensive purchase I ever made and within a week I had bought the 1.4 extender which for the purpose of the review shall be included as a package. The two packages come out fairly similarly with the Tamron obviously being 150-500 f/5-6.7 and the Fuji being 150-560 f/6.7-8.

Build Quality and Features

At 1725g the Tamron is 400 grams heavier than the Fuji and this extra weight is obvious in the hand but also in terms of significantly reassuring build quality, it is built like a tank and those 400 grams take into account more image stabilisation options and 3 focus limiting options, 0-10m, 10-infinity and all. This compares to the all and 5m-infinity that Fujifilm offer. The switches on the Tamron are all very firm and you know they have been clicked. Unfortunately Tamron have not built this lens for use with the 1.4x tele or any other converter. This would have made for a very interesting test.

 The 100-400 build quality has always been a major weakness in my eyes, it feels plasticky and the tripod mount screws have a habit of loosening (as do the screws holding the lens mount which is enormously off-putting). This screw issue is something that has always perturbed me when it comes to considering the level of weather resistance promised with the lens. I didn’t realise how low the standard of the 100-400 was until I acquired Fujifilm 50-140 and 16-55 f/2.8 lenses which are of supreme quality.

Focusing

I would be inclined to say that the 100-400 feels a little more reassuring in focusing. I would expect that to be the case with a native lens. The focus seems to lock slightly more accurately. However, because the 100-400 only has one focus limiting option I often have a real issue when trying to focus on small birds close up. The focus will miss and hunt. Luckily experience tells me to half hold the shutter and initiate the AF+MF focus option to roughly manually focus then the AF will find it. If a rare bird was to perch for a couple of seconds, I would be more confident of getting a passable shot with the Tamron but more likely to get something very sharp with the Fujifilm. Action photography was a different story. Unfortunately I felt that the Tamron lens was not anywhere near as accurate to the point where I did not feel I could trust it in the same situations I trust the 100-400. Fujifilm have had seven years to tweak autofocus with firmware updates and  Tamron will no doubt work on a fix for this.

Left – pushing the zoom ring forward until the white ring shows friction-locks it at any setting. Right – the lock switch works only at 150mm to hold it firmly when carrying.

Handling

The zoom rings on both lenses I would say are missing the sweet spot – the Fuji feels a touch light, turning is easy but always feels slightly lacking in reassurance, the Tamron is slightly too firm, it would be difficult to zoom accurately as you follow the action. I think the Fujifilm is slightly better on this. Both have zoom locks to stop the lens extending with gravity. The Tamron has a friction lock which is ideal for holding at a set focal length, however if you are using it in a high octane environment it is very easy to accidentally apply it. This is a nice feature and adds to the premium feel of the lens but I used it much less than I thought I would and much of the time I did use it was by mistake! The weight is also a big factor here. I have photographed many sports matches with the 100-400 without any fatigue issues, the Tamron was not a problem for me but I am in my mid-30s and pretty strong. If photographers are concerned about weight on the 100-400 the Tamron offering will be too heavy.

Tripod Use

A pet peeve of mine is that neither the 100-400 or 50-140 have an Arca-Swiss plate on their tripod mount. This lack of attention is downright sloppy and luckily has been rectified with the 150-600. It means putting a third party one on. But given these lenses are almost exclusively used with a battery grip, this then means the camera will not sit flat on a table with the tripod plate added. This also adds a tiny bit more rock into the setup when moving the camera to find a subject and another thing that could come loose in part of the setup. The 100-400 with a 1.4x tele has a bit off rock in the mount and it never feels rock solid. This added to the fact that the tripod mount locking screws have a habit of coming loose is another issue while using the lens on a tripod.

The Fuji system is tripod, Arca-Swiss Plate, lens mount, lens, 1.4 tele, camera so there are five elements of potential play.

The Tamron on the other hand feels a lot more like it is the native lens when using on the tripod. When locked into my Peak Design tripod, it feels like one solid unit The Arca-Swiss mount sits snugly and the lens even feels tighter in the X-Mount system. The tripod mount is rock solid but it is clumsy and has a habit of getting in the way of the switches which significantly reduces the ability to react quickly to surprising action. Manual focus is also very tricky to get at when looking through the EVF. 

Image Quality

My standard workflow with the images is to put them through Lightroom and Topaz Denoise when high ISO is required by Scottish Winter. Given it was December and miserable, the lenses were having to work hard at about 1/250 and ISO of 1600-3200. Generally speaking I would say the images from the Fujifilm were a bit sharper, but the images from the Tamron had more pleasing colour and contrast. This is unsurprising as I feel my Fuji 50-140 f/2.8 is definitely better with colour than the 100-400. Personally I feel the thing that makes photographs of birds special is the detail in the feathers and the increased contrast can be added in post.

See: Tamron EU info on the lens

In The Field

Birds

Sharp head and beak with motion in the wings, 1/125s at f/6.7 full aperture, 500mm, ISO 2000

I am lucky to have a very active bird feeding station in my garden with an army of finches trying to eat into my camera budget by emptying feeders in moments. I have a tripod set up in by the French doors and snap away infinitely (electronic shutter is very handy for this as no rolling shutter issues are really noticeable and without this I would be looking at a number of new shutter motors). I have been able to photograph the same bird on the same feeder within seconds using both lenses and settings and really image quality is so close to interchangeable. Looking back at the vast array of finished images I took over the month it would be very difficult to judge which lens took them.

At f/6.7 and 500mm, 1/250s at ISO 1600

Rugby

I have photographed a number of rugby matches with the 100-400 and am aware of where it hits the limitations. I know in good light I can use the 1.4x tele and when it isn’t I can’t. I used the Tamron for the first half and had to change in order to get more light in. Scottish Rugby in January is a real test for a lens and I think the Tamron met its match here, and looking though the hundreds of images I was disappointed by the focus accuracy compared to what I would have expected of the 100-400, but what was more odd was that focus was not locking and tracking, so I would maybe get 4 sharp images in a batch of 10. This cost me the crucial try scoring frame on one occasion.

1/1000s at f/6.3, ISO 3200, 408mm
At 500mm and f/6.7, to get 1/1000s needed ISO 6400

I am not saying the native glass would have got all 10 but I am confident that when focus locks it will stay on track when using that lens. I also discovered that the friction zoom lock became a total pain when using the lens for action photography, the number of times I had unsuspectingly initiated it and then couldn’t work out why the lens wasn’t turning was frustrating when concentrating on following the ball with the subject rapidly increasing in size. 

1/250s at f/13, ISO 160, 500mm – a bright subject by comparison with earthbound Scottish winter daylight

The Moon

It is rude to have a telephoto lens and not have a few goes at photographing the moon. I had the lens for quite a while before December in Scotland gave me a clear(ish) night. The lens performed very well but the location of the manual focus ring is very uncomfortable to use when the camera is on a tripod and trying to use the EVF focus peaking system Fujifilm offer.

In Conclusion

If this was a buying guide I would immediately say to go out and buy the Fujifilm 100-400 from WEX second hand. At time of writing you can pick up an ‘excellent’ condition version of the lens for £850 and the teleconverter for £250 which gives you a year of warranty and peace of mind. If you were not willing to buy used paying £1450 for the 100-400 plus £360 for the tele would be negligent. You would be better getting the Tamron for £1400 or the new 150-600 Fuji lens for £1800. Internet forums and Facebook will tell you that there are good copies of the 100-400 and bad but I suspect there are good users and bad!

Picking your priority is the most important thing here. The 100-400 offers you flexibility – when light is tricky you can sacrifice some reach for more light, vital in keeping the fastest shutter possible. It also seemed to have significantly better AF when shooting action and feels slightly better in the hand even if build quality is somewhat lacking.

The Tamron lens is beautifully made but that comes at a weight cost. Initially I loved the handling but with more use, I found the idiosyncrasies of button location, the bulky tripod mount and zoom lock all left me rather frustrated, I never quite got the muscle memory I thought I would. I would like to think any AF issues have been fixed with the recent firmware update (which came as I returned the lens). In order to make a case for buying a third party lens over a native one, I think I need a compelling reason to do so and I don’t think Tamron have given me one.

Charles Brooker is a freelance photographer and also specialises in picture framing and bespoke leatherwork, including handmade camera and equipment bags. He is based in the village of Kirk Yetholm at the northern extreme of the Pennine Way – see https://www.charlesbrooker.com

2023 off to a great start!

The world can look very different through the lens… in our January/February 2023 edition, we took a keyphrase ‘Distorted View’ and it runs through the issue in different ways. Michael Colin Campbell remains an early pioneer of digital imaging, with Adobe from the start, after his entry into photography plunged him into the most high-end darkroom work ever with dye transfer printing. William Mortensen proved a fascinating historic photographer to research, with his strangely distorted occult images and nudes hitting the eyes of the photographic world a century ago but still looking contemporary. The third photographer on our cover, Peter Karry, has pursued reflections and altered views in strong colour for many years and won awards for his travel and creative work.

To subscribe on Pocketmags (currently they have a sale on) just go to https://pocketmags.com/f2-cameracraft-magazine

We also have printed copies ready to post – we don’t keep a large stock of back issues so move fast! New subscriptions taken out in January will start with this issue.

1 2 3 68