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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 7, 2008, 7:41 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
jorgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 200
Default

I avoided commenting on the Sigma 105mm because I only know what I have read: that it is not of the same quality as the Sigma 150mm. The Sigma 150mm is said to be very good, possibly nearly as good as the Olympus macros.

Everybody and their grandmother love the 35mm and/or 50mm, because both are excellent in all respects.

What is necessary for low-light depends on who you ask. You would only need something else for low-light photo if you want to shoot at a large aperture with a fixed focal length lens. You don't need a high-grade lens for low-light photo as the photo will be coarse anyway. If you want to shoot at 100 ISO at night, get a good tripod (don't buy a cheap one as you will regret that!).

Get for example Neat Image (free of charge) to clean up 800 and 1600 ISO photos and you will be fine as long as you don't underexpose unless necessary.

Though I get the impression that the money are burning in your pocket and have to be spent: consider buying an extension ring and use it with the 40-150mm for macro. You can get some very good results with this, if you don't need 1:1. Then you will know how much macro you will be doing and can later extend with a macro lens if you think you need it.

As I wrote in the e-3 versus e-510 thread: "Many people are obcessed with sharpness, distortion etc. The fact is that all Olympus lenses are very good. People should be far more obcessed with image content than with sharpness."

Jorgen
http://www.photoblog.com/jorgen

jorgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 7, 2008, 9:16 AM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 44
Default

Thanks Jorgen,

I forgot about the extension ring. What limitations would that have? Would the camera work exactly the same as with the 40-150 generally? I think they're about £100 here wherea for another £45 I could get the 35mm!!

Mike
miked2372 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 7, 2008, 9:56 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
jorgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 200
Default

With the 40-150 you will first broadly "focus" with the zoom and then with the autofocus (or manual focus). Hmmm, it costs a lot of money for just a "hole" with a few contacts for the electronics. However, the advantage is that you can use it with other tele lenses and it would be very, very good with the very sharp 50-200mm lens.

With these prices, I would go for the 35mm. I wouldn't dare to buy a lens on eBay, but buying an extension ring must be safe. Some third party may also make a cheaper extension ring one day.

jorgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2008, 3:10 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 44
Default

Last question (Honest)

How close do you have to get with the 35mm to take good macros?

(UPDATE)

Not to worry. Found the info and have ordered the Lens (£120 delivered). Can't wait to get it and try it out now!
miked2372 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 12:29 PM.