Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 24, 2007, 6:15 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,530
Default

Thought I'd play around with off camera flash with the FL50 and my good ol Sunpak 383, the 383 being connected via a pc sync cable to the E1. I also wanted to see how close I could get to the subject and stay in focus with the 14-54ZD. This was taken at about 15mm from the front of the lens - not bad for a non macro lens. I tried the same shot with my FZ10 but it just couldn' t focus that close even in manual mode. Now I've decided I'm holding off any new lens purchase until after PMA and so in the meantime I'm thinking of picking up a Nikon 6T macro filter for the 14-54 and I think they could make a cracker of a combo. Shot as is - converted from RAW in Lightzone.




Cheers

HarjTT

PS. I'm still on Indian time and hence the watch showing the 22nd!

HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 24, 2007, 6:48 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Yes, it does get quite close, doesn't it!

Think about this possibility, too. The 50-200 has the same front filter size. Combine that lens with the EX25 macro tube AND the Nikon 6T and just imagine the possibilities with the longer working distance and being f2.8 at 50mm instead of 3.5 like the 14-54. Here's one I took today at the Dallas Arboretum with the 50-200 and tube...


Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2007, 7:21 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,530
Default

Hi Greg, neato shot. What was the distance on that one and the cool macro shots you posted the other day? Just a few questions on the 50-200 (i) it looks like a big bit of glass and i was wondering how comfortable the lens is to carry around and (2) how do you manage to get such tack sharp shots without carrying a tripod ? Finally do you think the EX macro tube is worth getting for the extra $$$ ( I know thats a yes as you wouldn;t have purchased it if it weren't!)

Cheers

HarjTT

:? :O
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2007, 9:30 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
Hi Greg, neato shot. What was the distance on that one and the cool macro shots you posted the other day? Just a few questions on the 50-200 (i) it looks like a big bit of glass and i was wondering how comfortable the lens is to carry around and (2) how do you manage to get such tack sharp shots without carrying a tripod ? Finally do you think the EX macro tube is worth getting for the extra $$$ ( I know thats a yes as you wouldn;t have purchased it if it weren't!)

Cheers

HarjTT

:? :O
Hi Harjtt,

In the flower shot I just posted above, I had the lens zoomed to 200mm. With the tube fitted, the minimum distance varies depending on the focal length you have set. The 50-200 focuses to just under 4 feet all by itself. I would guess I was around 3 feet or so (around 1 meter) when I shot those flowers- I was standing over them and just pointed my setup down. The closeups of the orchids were taken with the lens zoomed to 60mm, which allows you to focus to within just a few inches. Don't know the metric equivalent, but if I had just moved a little forward the lens would have hit the orchid.

We had a nasty day here...big sandstorm hit while I was at the Arboretum. When I arrived the sky was clear and blue, but it was windy. By the time I walked to my car, the sky was red with sand and the wind was blowing....hard. It took a lot of patience to shoot today. I got my shots between wind gusts. Downloaded 68 image files, and I changed lenses a few times while I was there...not a spec of dust I can see on any of them. Before taking the 50-200 off the E330 I wiped a very fine layer of dust off the lens itself.

The 50-200 is not light, but it's much easier to carry than the 100-400L Canon EF lens I used to carry back when I was shooting with a 10D, The weight kind of acts as a counter-balance in keeping your outfit steady. With the E330 instead of the E1+battery pack, I don't consider the setup heavy at all, and I survived 14 days of toting the E300 and my three lenses around in Paris without too much trouble. It's definitely heavier than the 40-150 f3.5-4.5 Zuiko, but not so much heavier that it's a problem.

I think the tube is definitely worth the money when used with the 50-200 because it's useable throughout the entire focal range. I just tried it with the 14-54....forget it! At 54mm you are almost touching the subject and from there it's just not useable. If I remember correctly, the 55mm Micro Nikkor I used to own went to 1:1 with a 27.5mm tub, so 50mm is probably the widestpractical focal length to usewith the Olympus tube.

As far as shooting without a tripod, I've never liked carry them...never. I practice a lot and I've always had fairly steady hands. I will say, in using the 1.4 Olympus teleconverter I have met my match. You REALLY need either a tripod or a camera with built-in image stabilization toshot at 283mm, especially if you don't have enough light to achieve, for me, at least 1/500 sec shutter speed, and somethimes that isn't good enough. I can do well with the converter attached and with the lens zoomed to somewhere between150-175mm.

Here's where I'm loading additionalpictures I've taken with the 50-200+EX25:

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/2510886#131843133
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2007, 11:03 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
Default

Real nice shots Greg i just picked up the 25x tube and the 50-200 and i know its going to take a lot of shots and alot of outings to get used to them but i well give it hell.I also picked up 14-54 and the 50mm macro and the 1.4 teleconverter. i have tried all the lenes with both the 25x tube and the 1.4 teleconverter and it seem to me i have a lot of pratice to figure them all out. (PAT):|
hotrodmanpsg4@comcast.net is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2007, 12:07 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
-=edge=-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 220
Default



ZD 14-54mm, 1/160 F3.3 @42mm, iso 125, spot metering...i sold my 50-200mm just 2 weeks ago, it was a good set of glass, but i never used it..i'm waiting for something else
-=edge=- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2007, 12:20 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

OK, OK....just don't shoot!

yes, the 14-54 is darn good. I hope you get what you think you're going to get, or at least what youhope you'll get. The main thing I get with the 50-200 and EX-25 tube that you don't get with the 14-54 by itself is working distance and, more important to me, it was available now.

Of course, I'm also hoping someday to havesomething else- abody with built-in stabilization. We're all hoping for something down the road. I hope we all get it.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:26 AM.