Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Olympus dSLR (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-dslr-40/)
-   -   Flamingo (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-dslr/101951-flamingo.html)

campoly Oct 26, 2006 7:27 PM

Your flamingo shot is just another example of how fabulous the Oly kit lens are. I would like to have a Leica as well but I read somewhere that it isn't any sharper than the ZD lens'. I've used Sigmas in the past (old film days) and wasn't very happy with them-probably a different story these days. I have the 11-22, 50macro, 50-200, 14-54 and the kit lens that came with my E-500 and couldn't be happier. I wish I could use my old Canon 50mm 1.2 on the Oly digital cameras. It's a very sweet lens.

Old Jim Oct 26, 2006 8:06 PM

Another Great shot Donna. I wish you would leave your EXIF data in your photos so we could see your settings. None the less still a great photo.

D.Ann Oct 26, 2006 8:20 PM

Campoly, If I were to buy another lens after the kit, what would you recommend? and Jim: I will try to leave exif...how to other than just looking it up. donna

campoly Oct 26, 2006 9:40 PM

D. Ann,

I presume that you want to move up to one of the higher grade lens or maybe the ED 18-180mm. It is hard to recommend a lens not knowing your shooting habits.

The 50mm is a nice lens for portrait and macro (not really true macro though unless you add the extention tube). It is light and sharp and easy to get along with but the 100mm focal length (in 35mm terms) is not the focal length I want to shoot in all the time. The 14-54mm is a very nice walk-about general purpose lens and also a joy to use and I've gotten some very nice results with it and it is a very close focusing lens, even closer than the 50mm.

Like I said earlier, I love all of my Oly lens' but as far as sheer performance goes, I don't think the 50-200mm and the 11-22mm can be beat -period (unless perhaps it's by one of Oly's $$$ "super high grade" (their terms) lens' (at which point one begins to wonder when the point of diminishing returns starts to kick in :O).

Of course, these are more of a specialized lens and you certianly wouldn't want to carry around the 50-200 all the time but the 11-22 at the long end (22mm) does come close to being a "normal" lens (in 35mm terms). One of my cameras (usually the E-1) always has the 11-22 and the other camera (E-500) usually has the 14-54mm on them. But I love it when ever I need to whip out the 50-200 :cool:.

BTW, what are your shooting habits besides flamingos?
P.S- What ISO did you shoot the flamingo at?

D.Ann Oct 26, 2006 9:42 PM

nature...birds, waterfowl...that sort of thing. donna

campoly Oct 26, 2006 9:56 PM

Got a good tripod? Sounds like you just might need the 50-200mm unless you can get really close to the birds and waterfowl. BTW, what was the ISO on the flamingo shot?




D.Ann wrote:
Quote:

nature...birds, waterfowl...that sort of thing. donna

cjtune Oct 30, 2006 6:09 AM

Nice shot there, Donna. What I really like about it is how the shadows bring out the detail in the feathers in the bottom half of the picture.


DougJGreen Oct 30, 2006 8:40 AM

Unfortunately, from a discussion on another thread, she really needs MORE lens than the 50-200, or even that plus a 1.4 TC

She's not able to reach the subjects she wants - birds - with her 40-150. Both she and I are going to be looking at the Sigma 135-400 and the Bigma (50-500).


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2