Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Olympus Micro Four Thirds (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-micro-four-thirds-103/)
-   -   At the Botanical Gardens- EP3 and a couple of lenses (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-micro-four-thirds-103/botanical-gardens-ep3-couple-lenses-193220/)

Greg Chappell Oct 29, 2011 11:32 PM

At the Botanical Gardens- EP3 and a couple of lenses
 
I've taken my Olympus DSLR and 12-60mm f2.8-4 and 50-200mm f2.8-3.5 in to the tropical greenhouse before, but the lighting meant I really needed faster lenses.

Enter the 45mm f1.8. It could focus closer, but wide open you still can separate subjects from the background. More importantly, you can keep your shutter speeds up and keep the ISO down at 200.

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/...A291747-X2.jpg

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/...A291755-X2.jpg

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/...A291763-X2.jpg

Pretty obvious here where the focus was set..

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/...A291764-X2.jpg

I decided, after shooting the 17mm f2.8 M. Zuiko this afternoon, it's a pretty darn nice little lens. The chrome one also looks quite svelte on my chrome E-P3.

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/...A291725-X2.jpg

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/...A291720-X2.jpg

Tullio Oct 30, 2011 4:13 PM

Nice series, Greg. I had the 17mm once and sold it with the EP1. I did not mind getting ri of the EP1 (never cared for the lack of flash, poor LCD resolution and no ability to add the VF2) but I did miss the 17mm. I find it to be an underrated lens. Maybe the build is not as solid as the Lumix 20mm and 14mm but the optics are pretty decent. It would be nice if it was a f2.0 lens rather than 2.8. I bet it would have been much more popular.

James Emory Nov 1, 2011 8:44 AM

Aside from the lower fstop, how does the 17mm pancake lens stack up against the Zuiko 14-42mm II lens in terms of image quality at the 17mm focal length?

Greg Chappell Nov 1, 2011 10:01 AM

I've not done a direct comparison between the two so I'm not sure. At 18mm, the maximum aperture of the 14-42 is f3.9 so as you noted the 17mm has a close to one stop advantage in speed, so I would not doubt the 17mm is probably as good at f4 as the zoom is stopped down to f5.6.

The second advantage of the 17 is just its' size. The 14-42 has to be unlocked and extended into shooting position before it can be set to the same 17mm setting, which makes it, at that point, substantially longer than the 17/2.8. Against that you have to give the 14-42 an edge in that its' a zoom and you can freely move between 14 and 42mm. My three lens replacement now for the 14-42 is the 12mm f2, 17/2.8 and 45/1.8. Wider, faster and, at the two ends, much better optically. When I need longer, I'm using the 75-300 M. Zuiko.

zig-123 Nov 1, 2011 4:41 PM

Hi Greg,

Your photos always make me want to grab my camera, hop in the car and look for 'stuff' to photograph. These are no different. The 2nd image with the focus on just the tip of the bloom is my favorite composition. Just lovely.

You've quietly, yet systematically gone ahead and converted over to the m43 system. The results certainly say it all when it comes to what the camera and lenses are capable of when in the proper hands.

regards,

Zig

LTZ470 Nov 2, 2011 6:00 AM

Fantastic Greg!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:20 PM.