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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 29, 2007, 2:37 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
langdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 11
Default

Hello everyone I have been lurking in all the forums reading everything I could on the camera that I have. It is an e-500 Olympus and I need to know if anyone had any suggestions on a lens that I could zoom in on a face from around 50 yards. My children are in alot of sports and I need a good lens to be able to get there facial expression and such. The lens I have now are the ones that came with the camera and when I zoom in its just not close enough for me. I keep seeing everyone talk about the 50-200mm lens but I need to know if that will be good enough. if anyone has any pics out there with the 50-200mm lens that they could share I would greatly appreciate it. Also when I do take pics some of them are turning out grainy, is that because I have the ISO set to high. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
langdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 29, 2007, 5:36 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
airbrushjohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 747
Default

the 50-200mm 2.8-3.5 is a great lens! i useit all the time. and as far as the grainy look yes you have the iso high. there are a couple of free programs NEAT IMAGE, and NOISE NINJA. to get rid of most of the noise. these pics are straight out of the camera, no photchop, just cropped to post here.

moderators i am not hijacking this thread, he asked for pics






airbrushjohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 5:53 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
airbrushjohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 747
Default

here are some that were taken at night in the rain.





just remember this lens has a very narrow depth of field, it takes a little getting used to! also the only other option for sports with olympus, is the 90-250mm 2.8, but that bad boy is like $ 5600. good luck! john
airbrushjohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2007, 12:21 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
langdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 11
Default

great pics. Thanks. On your night pics how do you get them so clear. When I take night pics they come out blurry. Is that because of the shutter speed. Obviously I have no experience with cameras just learning. Sorry if these question are stupid. What were your setting on your camera for the night pics.
langdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2007, 4:05 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I would suggest that you need something longer than 200 or even 250mm to zoom in on the faces at 50 yards. I don't think you will even fill the frame with the your children at these ranges without going to a 300mm+ lens so most of us when shooting sports concentrate on getting good results at closer ranges. The further the subject is away the softer it will be as you are not in the optimum focus range. With the 50-200mm lens mentioned I would suggest no further than 20 or 25 years to get good sharp results.

To get photos without blur you need a fast shutter speed so having a wide aperture (low f number) which allows more light in is very helpful and you will need f2.8 if shooting at night. In the night photos John is using ISO 1600 and f3.5 (the wides aperture at the zoom used) to allow the fastest shutter speed which in the shots is 1/200th and 1/250th.

If you are shooting in the day and you really need to have the extra zoom then there are some Sigma lenses that you could look at, the 50-500mm and 135-400mm however neither of these is as well built as the high quality 50-200mm f2.8-3.5. Also as soon as it gets a bit cloudy you won't really get the shutter speeds you would want and at those focal lengths you are going to want to be using a monopod at all times.


Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2007, 7:20 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
langdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 11
Default

thanks Mark for the info.
langdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2007, 7:27 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
airbrushjohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 747
Default

hi langdon,

mark is the man who has helped me very much! if it wasn't for me asking him about sports, i would still be using the crazy settings that come on the 500, sports mode, kids mode, all the fru fru stuff that really doesn't teach you about learning the camera! or how to take photographs. and i have learned, NO electronics can make you a great photographer! no matter how cool those gizmos are! hahahahahahahahahaa did i just gizmos?
airbrushjohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2007, 7:56 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
langdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 11
Default

yes you did just say gizmos, but that's alright haha. I had talked to a crime scene photographer last night and he said the same thing about all the presets on the camera, they aren't worth a darn. We have a well known photography store in town and they teach weekend classes on specific things such as sports photography, wedding, and general photography. They even have classes on your specific camera. I heard the instructor for the Olympus had been a photographer for over 20 years, so I guess I will take a class and see what I can learn. I still don't really understand all aperture settings and shutter speed stuff but I am reading everything I can find. Thanks for all the info guys, I appreciate it. gotta go, I am headed out to Panama City this morning. I'll see what kind of photos I can get there and I'll put some up on the forum so you can critique them.
langdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2007, 8:04 AM   #9
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Theory is great, however for most people it is not until you put it into practise that it will make sense. When you start seeing how the shutter speed controls motion, or the aperture changes how much of a shot is sharp, and then realise that changing shutter or aperture will affect the opposite.... oh and then we need to put ISO into the equation.... LOL that is why you need to see it yourself in practical terms.

I'm one of those people who loves to learn new things so I spend a huge (probably too much) amount of time when not out with the camera reading up on techniques to give me more ideas for creative shooting.

For you the best thing is post, read replies, try the new ideas and repeat. Don't forget you are digital, the cost is minimal so when you are out try something new, if it doesn't work who cares, if it does you have learnt something!!!!
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2007, 7:03 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

I agree with airbrushjohn that the 50-200 is a nice lens. It is the most used lens I own.

Many, me included, were astounded by how little magnification the big lenses supply. The reason is that the function is different that a spotting scope (which primary purpose is to magnify), while the camera lens has a purpose of focusing as much light on the sensor as its aperture will allow. In other words, you can make it big, or you can make it bright, but to make it both big and bright costs ALOT of money.

The 50-200 has the reach in 35mm terms of 400mm f3.5 which is pretty good. It won't do what you are talking about with only faces at 50 yards. Olympus also has an excellent teleconverter (the EC-14) which will give a reach of 566mm f4.9 (35mm equiv) and that also won't do what you want without cropping.

This photo is about a 3mp crop taken from about 15 yards by the 50-200/EC-14 combo.


fldspringer 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 9:00 AM.