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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 10, 2009, 4:29 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default the prerequisite Bird photo using the 70-300mm

Well, the whole point of getting this 70-300mm was to shoot pics of birds (the kind that fly - not the ones that Harj shoots).

Below is one of the 1st images I took this late morning. 1st thing I found out today is it will be difficult to use this lens in place of the much faster 50-200m when shooting birds in my office. The light is such that there just isn't enough
to pick up the detail in the feathers, etc.I have made some adjustments and will try them tomorrow.
Attached Images
 
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2009, 4:32 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
Well, the whole point of getting this 70-300mm was to shoot pics of birds (the kind that fly - not the ones that Harj shoots).

Below is one of the 1st images I took this late morning. 1st thing I found out today is it will be difficult to use this lens in place of the much faster 50-200m when shooting birds in my office. The light is such that there just isn't enough
to pick up the detail in the feathers, etc.I have made some adjustments and will try them tomorrow.
Hmmmmmmmm... looks might fine to me.
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 9:25 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 722
Default

Zig,
I have the same issues, it craves a lot of light to get the real good shots. It's a matter of compromise with ISO, Ap, and shutter to get the shots if the light is fading. Late afternoon I immediately set the aperature at 5.6 and ISO at 2 or 400 to start. With the higher end models ISO may not be as much an issue but I really don't like anything I shoot over 400 ISO with the 510 in low light. I spent a bit of time shooting hawks earlier this year, in good light the camera did well but I had to go to 800 to get a half way decent shot in the evening and they didn't turn out that good. Still a great lens but it has limitations the faster lenses like the 50 200 don't have.
eharrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 10:12 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eharrim View Post
Zig,
I have the same issues, it craves a lot of light to get the real good shots. It's a matter of compromise with ISO, Ap, and shutter to get the shots if the light is fading. Late afternoon I immediately set the aperature at 5.6 and ISO at 2 or 400 to start. With the higher end models ISO may not be as much an issue but I really don't like anything I shoot over 400 ISO with the 510 in low light. I spent a bit of time shooting hawks earlier this year, in good light the camera did well but I had to go to 800 to get a half way decent shot in the evening and they didn't turn out that good. Still a great lens but it has limitations the faster lenses like the 50 200 don't have.
Hi Eric,

You're right the 70-300mm is a light hog. And, your comments on the ISO performance between the E-510 and the E-30 are also pretty accurate (based on my experience with both)

With the E-30, I start out shooting at 500 and go up to 1250, depending on the lighting. The E-30 has the ability of working with a great many more ISO settings than the E-510. Generally, the output, while being a little noisier, can be cleaned up fairly easily with ACR,, neat image or noiseware. The important thing is with the E-30 (and I'm fairly certain that the E-620 is the same) the OOC Jpegs appear to have more detail as compared to the E-510.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 11:20 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 722
Default

Oh boy, now I'm in trouble. How am I going to sneak a credit card bill for the 620 past the wife next year : )
eharrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 11:23 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
Hi Eric,

You're right the 70-300mm is a light hog. And, your comments on the ISO performance between the E-510 and the E-30 are also pretty accurate (based on my experience with both)

With the E-30, I start out shooting at 500 and go up to 1250, depending on the lighting. The E-30 has the ability of working with a great many more ISO settings than the E-510. Generally, the output, while being a little noisier, can be cleaned up fairly easily with ACR,, neat image or noiseware. The important thing is with the E-30 (and I'm fairly certain that the E-620 is the same) the OOC Jpegs appear to have more detail as compared to the E-510.

Zig
Amen. Just took the first bunch this morning in low light at ISO800 and, while they came out "OK", it just didn't trip my trigger. Then, about 20 minutes ago in bright sunlight, this

__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 12:33 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi Gary,
Yes, the lens certainly delivers - when you give it enough light!
Nice shot.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 1:04 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default shot taken this morning then pp w/neat image

Not sure how many people are familiar with or use neat image as a noise removal plug-in for PSE and Photoshop. I've used it for quite a while and have been pretty happy with the results. The image that follows was cleaned up with the latest download from NeatImage for Mac.
By the way, this image is not cropped- it is as it came out of the camera.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by zig-123; Dec 11, 2009 at 1:58 PM.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 3:31 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,554
Default

.......that is a neat shot Zig, she is a good looking lady. ONE DAY I am going to make a bird picture too! I'm thinking about a EC-20 on the 70-300 and a couple big sandbags.

As you likely know I use BibblePro for RAW conversion, it uses a basic load of Noise Ninja which can be upgraded to a full version but I've never seen a need. My process always applies a bit of the Ninja and ALWAYS there is a plus result,,,, it works very well

Too, I've been following yours and Greg's (DFW) mention on using ACR for jpeg corrections, BibblePro also does a credible job fixing jpg files and I often use it for exposure and noise fixes to jpg photos from my C7070WZ and for those snaps my wife makes with her Canon SD200.
boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2009, 3:39 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Wow Zig....there's a lot of detail in that last image. Really nice.

Still liking that E30 I would imagine!
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 6:41 AM.