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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 12, 2010, 2:40 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Washington State
Posts: 930
Default

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

I haven't yet had a chance to try the combo out in the early morning or late afternoon Sun as the timing and weather just hasn't worked out as yet. But I think that's when I might be able to get better feather detail and greater clarity.

And, as Greg (the northern one) correctly pointed out, I've got to do a better job of stopping down the aperture setting to maximize DOF. I forgot that by adding the EC-20 you lose 2 stops.

This combo doesn't compare to the output of Greg's 300mm 2.8, but I'm a lot more mobile with this outfit than lugging that beast around all day.
Out of curiosity, how does it compare to lugging around the Sigma? Not that you would choose to carry the latter around instead considering the great shots you get with the 50-200 combo.

John
jelow1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2010, 3:13 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Zig, those are looking just great!

HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2010, 8:47 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post

And, as Greg (the northern one) correctly pointed out, I've got to do a better job of stopping down the aperture setting to maximize DOF. I forgot that by adding the EC-20 you lose 2 stops.
Actually I was saying that you did well with the DOF. I was saying that my 300 f2.8/EC-14 (implied, about the exact same reach) would have to be stopped down that much also for the same subject at the same distance. I'd have a brighter viewfinder and I'd be able to autofocus in poorer light, but otherwise all that speed is irrelevant as I need to stop down to the same point to get the DOF.

I'm saying that your combo is not all that handicapped because you'd need to stop down that much anyway.

Greg

Last edited by fldspringer; Mar 12, 2010 at 8:49 PM.
fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2010, 12:51 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelow1966 View Post
Out of curiosity, how does it compare to lugging around the Sigma? Not that you would choose to carry the latter around instead considering the great shots you get with the 50-200 combo.

John
Hi John,

The 50-200mm/EC-20 telecon mounted to the E-30 is is a bit more formidable a set up as the E-30 with the Sigma 135-400mm in terms of weight and sheer size. I will say that both would benefit from the addition of a monopod.
Based on Ted K's recommendation, I got a Neopod 7 monopod and find that it makes a huge difference in lugging that equipment around all day. Without the monopod, I actually prefer the 50-200mm/EC-20 combo because while it is a bit heavier, it seems to balance better in my hand.

And, as you stated, it is hard for me to get cranked up about putting on the Sigma when the 50-20mm combo is outputting images at 400mm focal length that are significantly sharper.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2010, 12:54 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fldspringer View Post
Actually I was saying that you did well with the DOF. I was saying that my 300 f2.8/EC-14 (implied, about the exact same reach) would have to be stopped down that much also for the same subject at the same distance. I'd have a brighter viewfinder and I'd be able to autofocus in poorer light, but otherwise all that speed is irrelevant as I need to stop down to the same point to get the DOF.

I'm saying that your combo is not all that handicapped because you'd need to stop down that much anyway.

Greg
Thanks Greg, I misread your post. But, there is little doubt in my mind that your images coming out of the 300mm show far greater feather detail than what I've been able to achieve to this point.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2010, 12:55 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarjTT View Post
Zig, those are looking just great!


Hi Harj,

Thanks much.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2010, 1:08 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
Thanks Greg, I misread your post. But, there is little doubt in my mind that your images coming out of the 300mm show far greater feather detail than what I've been able to achieve to this point.
I'd be bummed if there wasn't at least a little difference. That and I can push it to 600mm with the EC-20 and still have f5.6, but oh that price.

Greg
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 2:23 PM.