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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 2, 2008, 8:53 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Hi Ted, Bob, Dennis

Thanks for the comments on the pic - regards T she is very pretty and as this was her first ever shoot I'd say she's an excellent model with a lot of potential and more importantly really fun to be about.

Ted, I'm with you on the pricing of the 14-35, for such a short FL I find it really hard how OLy can justify the price. At 1500 USD it would be better priced but if your bed and butter depends on the quality of your work then you may not have a choice. I've been comparing files from the 14-54ZD from the same shoot and the F2 is sharper at F2 than the 14-54ZD is at F4, there is more detail in the shot with the F2 (as if its a macro lens and everything is just visible - which has made me think about a makeup artist!), the bokeh is a lot smoother and finally if you get the exposure wrong the F2 seems to have a lot more room to correct the problem without adding noise. At F4 the files from the 35-100 don;t need any USM applied to it at all - although a 25% USM gives that wee bit more pop. If I was a pro I would be seriously considering the 14-35 - I'm not sure about the 12-60 simply becuase of the FL overlap with the 35-100, although those samples posted over at DP did look very good. The other thing I would like to see would be those shots taken with the 35-100 and E3 then compare to them.

Here's a shot with the 14-54ZD taken of T's friend "N" on the same shoot - I accidently chopped her chin ooff (not good - need E3!) I'll do some 100% crops so you can see the difference:

RAW, 14-54ZD USM - 50%





Cheers

Harj

PS.

Does anyone have the new 12-60SWD ? I've heard that it jumps to F4 pretty quickly is this correct ?
:? :O
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 5:50 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
If I was a pro I would be seriously considering the 14-35
Well it's easy for me to spend someone else's money <grin> but if you plan toshoot models (portrait photography) I just don't think flash is the way to go. As I mentioned before, a single light source rarely provides good lighting of a person's face regardless of how many diffusers/bouncers you add to the single flash head. But more importantly, there is no human being on this planet who is comfortable with a flash unit going off in their face - they certainy must instinctively sense the huge brain-wave spike a flash causes. Folks tolerate flashto some extent incircumstances where it is expected - family pix or weddings - but no one really likes it. So I think that if you want to maintain a good relationship with your models (and after seeing your models I would heartily recommend maintaining a good relationship <grin>) you'll not want to use flash. So if you think the 14-35F2 gets you within range for that photography if I were you I'd definitely consider it. Personally I'm thinking hard about it for indoor available-light people photography.


Ted


tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 6:03 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
Does anyone have the new 12-60SWD ? I've heard that it jumps to F4 pretty quickly is this correct ?
Hi, Harj

'Dunno about the Oly, but as a point of comparison the Leica 14-50mm f/2.8-3.5 gets to F3.5 at about 20mm which is pretty quickly. So for all practical purposes it's an F3.5 lens (albeit an extraordinarily good one).

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2008, 8:02 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Happy New Year to you all.

I can see by the Pics here I'm really going to have to get out and use my camera more and work on basics.

Just happy I can work with wildlife and not people. That's sounds really demanding. Great shots here and you've raised your standard again harjTT. Amazing close up detail.

[homer] Mmmmm...M3...! [/homer]
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 9:36 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
I've been comparing files from the 14-54ZD from the same shoot and the F2 is sharper at F2 than the 14-54ZD is at F4, there is more detail in the shot with the F2 (as if its a macro lens and everything is just visible - which has made me think about a makeup artist!), the bokeh is a lot smoother and finally if you get the exposure wrong the F2 seems to have a lot more room to correct the problem without adding noise.
Hi, Harj

On this subject, in the recent - Jan. 2008 - issue of Popular Photography, in his "Inside Straight" column Herbert Keppler argues that one should decide which lenses will be the most useful and then choose the camera body that will accept them, since the glass is way more important than the camera body. I'm very much inclined to agree with him. My first good DSLR was the Oly E20 and what was (and still is) remarkable about that cam is the lens - the 35mm equivalent of a 35-140mm F2.0-2.4, yet the whole 5MP camera weighs 1050 g.

It seems to me that at this time, for shooting in indoor available light we have the choice of fast (F2) lenses with a camera body that's OK with high ISO, or less-fast lenses with FullFrame bodies that have great high-ISO performance. The latter is just plain more expensive, despite the high price of the two Oly F2 zooms.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 12:51 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Hi Ted, Scouse

I'm like yourself a natural light shooter and still have a lot to learn when it comes to off camera flash. If I can get away with not using flash I will always try too and I think most us are like that but off camera flash esp for fashion/portraits is something that is going to be really useful to know and know well. What I need to do is discipline myslef ang go through the strobist.com online tutorials and then put them into practice.

Regrads lenses and camera bodies, I think the F2's with the E3 have provided an alternative to going FF esp to people liek myslef that had never made any investment into a system before. I had no plans on ever getting the 35-100, although I really liked the FL but I'm glad I did. If I was in the US it might have been different as the price difference between the new 50-200SWD and the F2 is still substanial where as UK prices, its just a couple of 100 pounds. Regards weight and size, I do wish the E3 was just that wee bit smaller and lighter and they put back the PASM dial and the on-off switch!

Cheers

Harj
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 5:27 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default



I'm glad you brought this up.

I do wish the E3 was just that wee bit smaller and lighter and they put back the PASM dial and the on-off switch!


Size doesn't bother me but the dial and switch has a comfort level to them.



I was looking at this little jewel...:SIGMA 50-500MM F4-6.3 EX DG OLYMPUS 4/3



Runs about $999 us



Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 5:32 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

HarjTT wrote:
Quote:
I do wish the E3 was just that wee bit smaller and lighter and they put back the PASM dial and the on-off switch!
Hi, Harj,

I totally appreciate the need for having any new cam menu and dial system be as close as possible to the one we're most familiar with - when things get busy you need to rely on experience to control the camera.

That said, I think the E3's system where you dial in the PASMB functions by holding down the Mode button and turning the rear dial, was done so that if you have programmed the MyMode 1 and MyMode 2 modes, they show up when you turn the rear dial. Thus you get yourcustom modes quickly if you have programmed them, which for some of us is a real plus and of course that would have been much more difficult to do with a top, hard-coded PASM dial. And the on-off switch still exists, but on the back.

Coming from an E500 I'm finding that the philosophy of the function types is unchanged and although the E3 menu/dial system is different than the E500 it is logical and easy to learn. So I think it will easily become second-nature for you after a bit of practice.

Ted


tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2008, 5:34 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Scouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Camano Island, WA.
Posts: 2,328
Default

Thanks Ted, I'm working with my E500 and that as you see above was a concern.

Ken
Scouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2008, 7:05 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Scouse wrote:
Quote:
Thanks Ted, I'm working with my E500 and that as you see above was a concern.

Ken
Hi, Ken

Ooops - I forgot that you had that concern also. I think the E3 is fine, and it is a comfortable fit in my hand so I'm not sure I'd want it to be smaller. Lighter, yes, but not necessarily smaller.

Ted
tkurkowski 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 7:58 AM.