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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 9, 2009, 7:06 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default a couple taken with the 70-300mm

The 70-300mm came in today but too late to try and shoot anything outside as it was after dark. So, decided to test the sharpness of the lens using my trusty 2" long Atlantic Salmon fly: The Durham Ranger. Then I compared the results to a photo of the same fly taken with the 12-60mm SWD. Hardly a fair comparison. Anyways, here's the results: (the middle image is the one taken using the 12-60mm)
Attached Images
   
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 9, 2009, 7:12 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,931
Default

heheheh My 70-300mm arrives tomorrow.

Nice shots!
__________________
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 9, 2009, 7:15 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Just a quick added note. Up 'til 2 weeks ago, I'd been using a Windows based pc. I'm now using an IMac. For some reason, which I can't explain, I'm having a couple of image downloading issues. So, sorry for the series of images that appear out of comparative size and out of order.

The 1st image was taken with the 70-300mm lens and E-30.
The 2nd taken with the 12-60mm and E-30
the 3rd taken using the 70-300mm lens attached to an EX-25 tube and E-30.

When viewed at 100%, there is a difference but at the sizes posted (limited to the max file size I can post on this site), it is very difficult to discern a difference.
Overall, the 70-300mm acquits itself quite well against a lens costing 3 to 4 times as much. Also, take note that I'm using a flash so, lighting isn't a factor.

Hopefully, tomorrow, the weather will improve to the point I can actually take a shot or two outside.
Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2009, 7:21 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default Thanks Gary

Thanks Gary,
You should really have a bit of fun when you get yours in.

Not sure if you're familiar with a site known as SLRGear.com. But, they review lenses made by all the manufacturers. There is a review on the 70-300mm which is worth reading. You'll find it on the home page as it was recently reviewed back in October.
In the review , they discuss the sweet spots of this lens as well as the best aperture settings for a given focal length.

It sure helps shortening the learning curve.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2009, 7:33 PM   #5
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
Thanks Gary,
You should really have a bit of fun when you get yours in.

Not sure if you're familiar with a site known as SLRGear.com. But, they review lenses made by all the manufacturers. There is a review on the 70-300mm which is worth reading. You'll find it on the home page as it was recently reviewed back in October.
In the review , they discuss the sweet spots of this lens as well as the best aperture settings for a given focal length.

It sure helps shortening the learning curve.

Zig
GREAT! I'll definitely have to scope that one out.
__________________
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 10, 2009, 4:59 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 722
Default

Good shots Zig, the 70 300 does well on macros. In my opinion it's the best all around lens out there under 300 dollars
eharrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2009, 7:57 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
boBBrennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas USA
Posts: 3,554
Default

....nice comparisons Zig, I must REALLY try using my 70-300 more as it continues to stay in my bag.

I am curious which browser you are using with the MAC.... a couple of my local MAC friends who are not active with forum/photography sites say they prefer Firefox to Safari. I don't know Safari but I have used Firefox going on 5 years for MSFT and Linux based OSs (except for MAC). I've also tried other browsers but stick with Firefox, I just like it better and never have problems.

It is so cold here (for this area) this am, low 20s, right now 25....brrrrrr, more coffee!
____
boBB
boBBrennan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2009, 11:26 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Excellent shots, Zig!

I still often switch out between my 50-200 and the 70-300. The weight difference in my bag is substantial, and the 70-300 gets very close all on its' own, which is very nice. With the EC20 to go with the 50-200, reach is no longer a reason for me to carry the 70-300 over the 50-200, but weight often is!

I concur with Bob, it's darn cold here, but I'll take this with no snow over what the northern Greg posted earlier!
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2009, 12:08 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi Guys,

Thanks for looking and taking the time to comment.

Eric, from a price to performance perspective, It really is difficult to beat the 70-300mm when comparing it to any other lens in the Oly line up. For sheer IQ, the 50mm f2.0 still is my favorite low cost performer. Image quality wise, it's about very close to being perfect. Granted, it's not exactly cheap. But you sure do get a a whole lot for your money.

During the process of evaluating various lenses, in the hopes of coming up with a better performer than the 70-300mm for long telephoto work I bought:
a Tokina MF 400mm f5.6 SD MF lens,
a Sigma 135-400mm f4.5-5.6 APO DG
an Oly 135mm f3.5 OM legacy lens for use with a EC-14 telecon
not to mention 3 previous 70-300mm lenses

After trying all of these out, I've come to the conclusion that, unless I get the Olympus ZD 300mm 2.8 and use it with a EC-14 telecon. Which, at this point, would be impossible, my best option is the 70-300mm and then living within it's limitations.

I'm especially impressed with the results of the 70-300mm as compared to the Sigma 135-400mm. The 70-300 flat out beats out the 135-400mm both in AF performance and IQ when used with the E-30. The Sigma 135-400 suffers from CA and a bit of vignetting at anything over a 200mm focal length. Add to that, the overall size and weight of the 135-400mm and the 70-300mm comes away a clear winner.


Bob, I guess for the first time in a long time, I can safely say that the weather here is better than where you are. While everyone else in the country was getting a good ol' Nor'easter yesterday, we had lots of rain. Today, the temps are in the 40's, the Sun is brilliant and there isn't a cloud in the sky.

Which leads me to saying I'm outta here. Gotta go try this 70-300mm outside!!!

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2009, 12:14 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
Excellent shots, Zig!

I still often switch out between my 50-200 and the 70-300. The weight difference in my bag is substantial, and the 70-300 gets very close all on its' own, which is very nice. With the EC20 to go with the 50-200, reach is no longer a reason for me to carry the 70-300 over the 50-200, but weight often is!

I concur with Bob, it's darn cold here, but I'll take this with no snow over what the northern Greg posted earlier!
Yes, the 70-300 sure makes life easy when going on a trip. One reason I bought the 70-300mm all over again was to take to a ballgame this Summer. I happened to take a look at some of the images taken at Fenway Park last year with the 70-300mm. For the sheer convenience of taking that lens and sticking it in my cargo pocket then walking thru security, nothing really beats it.
zig-123 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 7:09 AM.