2010 Football, it has never been this promising!

EPL has never been this interesting. It has NEVER been this tight. Especially in the past 3 years where MU and Chelsea has been so dominant. Now, almost ALL teams are equal.

If there’s 1 person that’s responsible for this revolution, it’s Ronaldo. Thank you for moving out from EPL. Your absence has balanced-out the power across all 20 teams on the table. The world is now at Yin-Yang.

Now, almost every team has a star equal to other team’s star. While I always think Chelsea will probably win the EPL this season with Drogba being a dominant force, the African cup will again balance things up.

But, other than Ronaldo’s absence, why are all the other team doing well? Why is Heskey playing like he’s 5 years younger? Or Rooney like he’s 5 years older? I think there are a few other reasons.

One key influencing factor is 2010’s World Cup. Everybody wants a go at it. So, everyone is playing doubly hard.

Another factor is, the past 3-5 years were development years for the smaller teams. Yes, the past 3-5 years has been nothing but Chelsea and MU punching and kicking the smaller teams. So, within their small little training camps, while wealthy investors pouring in the juices, they've been learning new karate moves. So, now - it's time to show what they've learnt.

But, let’s be real. Chelsea is already there. They have the belief, hunger and maturity. It’s only for them to lose. MU will shadow them as they cope life without Ronaldo. Arsenal, the team who never lies down dead, will also be there. That’s top 3.

Let’s talk a bit about Arsenal. Player by player, it’s like looking at your hometown U-21 team. I seriously can’t get into Wenger’s mind on this. Averagely, they are short too. But these boys have been sending out powerful messages. Always looking like a trophy winner of tomorrow, but sadly, never today. For the past 3 years, I dub Arsenal as the miracle team. Notice that without Bendtner, they can’t play long balls? And without Clichy, we can’t attack from left wing? So flawed, yet so entertaining. And their win-lose ratio is right up there with the big boys. They don’t buy stars. They create stars. Marvel stuff.

Anyway, 2010 is an interesting year for football. EPL is like never before. Champions League is heating up. And World Cup is coming up. Will we see another ‘head-butting’ action? I sure hope so.

Which Camera?

I think we're back to the photography age when there were dozens type of films on a rack. In the old days, there were full-format, medium-format, square-format, 30, 40, 80, 60, 100 series, 35mm, 8mm films etc etc. In fact, Wikipedia needed 27pages to describe all of the formats.

But, average Joes all over the world used the most popular type, which is the 35mm film. It's rectangular. And it's cheap.

Fast forward to the digital age, replacing the films is the IMAGE SENSOR. And we're kinda replicating the exact scenario of having multiple sizes / formats. Right now, as I know, there are already 6 to 7 sizes of image sensor.

1) 1/2.3" (approx.) used by compact cameras

2) 1/1.7" (approx.) - advanced compacts

3) 4/3rd - SLRs, Rangefinders

4) APSC - most SLRs

5) Full Frame* - Pro-grade SLRs, Rangefinders

6) Med Format - specialized SLRs

*similar size to 35mm film where the sensor is 35mm long too.

Size comparison between image sensors.

The simple analogy is that, the bigger the sensor, the bigger the camera is, but the better the image quality. So, if you're serious on upgrading the quality, simple rule #1: go for bigger sensor.

The compromise to image quality comes in when you need portability as SLRs are just huge and heavy. If cost is of no issue, a full-frame Rangefinder will fit the bill. It's small, light, quiet (see Leica M9) but packs higher image quality than the King of SLR, Nikon D3X. But unfortunately, cost is usually the issue.

But good thing is, currently, there are makers who are trying to slim-down the camera form-factor without slimming the image sensor. Notably Panasonic & Olympus (using 4/3rd sensor in a compact camera form) and Leica X1 (using APSC in compact form).

Reality check: The mass market wants portability AND quality images. And Panasonic GF1 and Olympus E-P2 hits the spot. But currently, they are being sold at premium cost as makers are trying to recover the development cost. In comparo, an entry level SLR with bigger image sensor e.g. APSC, is twice cheaper.

Remember that SLR has gone thru the same cycle. An entry level SLR used to be RM4K in 2007. Now it's selling at half of that price! So, I think, over time, the price for 'portable and light SLR-quality camera' like GF1 will drop... but don't hold your breath in 2010.

Canon S90 vs Panasonic LX3

www.neutralday.com

This is a very interesting race. It's one of those classic Schumacher vs Mika Hakkinen.

These 2 camera models are very special. It's a category with not much competition. These are 2 compacts with bigger balls than the rest of the pack.

It has full manual override control and a slightly bigger image sensor. It is also the ONLY 2 compacts that comes with fast f/2.0 aperture lens at wide open that are less than RM1.6K.

So, the big question is: Schumy or Mika?

My vote as of now is the Panasonic LX3. Mainly coz, if you're buying it, it's as good as buying a Leica D-Lux 4. And that says a lot. Another reason is that amazing lens. It starts at an unbelievable wide angle range of 24mm at f/2.0 and locks up 2.5x zoom later at f/2.8!

Lens to lens, the Canon S90 can't touch the LX3's Leica technical growl. For example, at the end of S90's focal range, the aperture drops to f/4.9. Yucks! But being a newer model, it trumps on user interface, especially the yummy 2 ring controls.

And why is Canon G11 not part of this list? Tho earmarked as Canon's flagship compact, G11 is undoubtedly ugly, chunky and can't go any better than f/2.8. Boo!

If you're a Canon fan, get the S90.

If you're a Leica fan but can't afford one, get the LX-3.

Either way, you can't go wrong.