Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus Micro Four Thirds

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 12, 2012, 2:42 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

More light is always helpful. As for the speed, it depends. It looks like the cat was pretty much standing still and the image is soft. I also find that those long zoom MF lenses don't work real well. They tend to produce very soft images and a lot of CA. Usually colors are washed out as well.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2012, 2:49 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
More light is always helpful. As for the speed, it depends. It looks like the cat was pretty much standing still and the image is soft. I also find that those long zoom MF lenses don't work real well. They tend to produce very soft images and a lot of CA. Usually colors are washed out as well.
Amen.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2012, 3:32 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

fwiw: the cat was taken in low light with the 40mm lens wide open at f1.8, I think my focus could have been better and the vf-2 that I have on the way ($179 refurb w/one year warranty from cameta) should help alot with that. I've since made a couple shots with the 40mm that I really like.

Thanks again for the input from everyone.

Tulio,

I doubt I would take the MF lenses on a trip either, although I really like the 40mm and will probably consider bringing that with me until I can afford something MFT in that focal range.

Ditto my reason behind the 300mm prime. I really would love to buy the 75-300mm MFT but I frankly don't have $850 to drop on it. I keep thinking about getting the 70-300mm 4/3 Olympus plus adapter but that's still around $300 for a used lens and a third party adapter....

neways... I will keep posting and please keep providing your feedback, it is much appreciated
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2012, 5:30 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Well, m4/3 lenses that have FL up to 300mm are expensive (the Lumix 100-300mm is cheaper than the Zuiko 75-300mm but still expensive). The alternative is the Lumix 45-200mm, which I quite like or the Zuiko 40-150mm, which is also excellent although it is much shorter. Both are reasonably priced. Since you have the EPL2, either lens will work great. If you had a Panasonic body, I'd recommend the Lumix lens because it has OIS, which the body does not have. Neither does the Zuiko lens because Olympus puts the image stabilization on the body instead.

If you are seriously thinking about getting 4/3 lenses (as opposed to m4/3), then you might want to checkout an adapter named Viltrox (I think you'll only find it on eBay). It's a 4/3 to m4/3 that actually has the electronic contacts for lens-body communication, so 4/3 lenses will AF. The adapter costs $60 (free shipping), which is half the cost of the Panasonic adapter. The Oly adapter is even more expensive than the Panny one.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2012, 6:21 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Tullio - thanks for the thoughts - I actually have and love the Panasonic 45-200mm - I just want a little extra length (no jokes please) - it is a tremendous value for the lens. I've heard the Lumix 100-300mm is not the sharpest (shoturtle's opinion).

On the 4/3 70-300mm plus adapter I keep going back and forth on getting this and in the end decide that the focus will frustrate me and I will have wasted money.. one could obviously argue that I am wasting money on the manual lenses and that may be true but at least it is a small amount of money... and hopefully tide me over till the 75-300mm goes on sale or maybe this lust worthy mirror lens..

http://hypebeast.com/2012/02/tokina-...o-four-thirds/
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2012, 6:55 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default

I'd wait for a few reviews before buying that mirror lens. It does have dark sides also. At f/6.3 you will always be using high ISO speeds to get the shutter speed you will need. And with manual focus, it's iffy at best for fast moving objects such as birds, etc.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2012, 10:18 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

There is absolutely no doubt that the IQ you get from the 70-300mm surpasses MF lenses. Yes the AF may be slow and yes it will frustrate you if you try to capture objects in movement. However, I think this lens is actually better than both Lumix 100-300 and Zuiko m4/3 75-300. From time to time you'll see the 70-300 price going down (I've seen as low as $299 on Amazon). Now that combined with a $60 adapter is a great deal. Probably the best option if you want to have a lens with 300mm reach.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2012, 10:45 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: oakville, on
Posts: 491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
... or maybe this lust worthy mirror lens...
Back in school we had the use of a Mamiya 500mm mirror tele and I really liked using it. The images had a special quality to them, hilights rendered as halos. Yes, you could only shoot from a tripod, and was limited to f8. And may not have been as tack sharp as from say a nikkor 300mm. But would I buy a mirror today, not likely -- software will get me close to that mirror look.
KulaCube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2012, 8:45 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

so this is a hoya 80-200mm hmc f4 lens (tokina made) I got as a bonus on a camera collection I bought for the 40mm f1.8 - actually matches my panasonic 45-200mm in sharpness imho...

female woodpecker, grey low light morning, hand held, 1/100 ISO 500 f5.6, forgot to put it in shutter priority but I think it came out alright anyways


female woodpecker 20120317 by ramcewan, on Flickr

and some pics of the lens if that interests anyone - these were taken with the 40mm

hoya_80-200mm mount view by ramcewan, on Flickr

hoya_80-200mm front view by ramcewan, on Flickr
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2012, 4:52 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

I like the woodpecker shot. It looks very sharp and colors are nice. I find MF 200mm lenses to be better performers than the 300mm ones.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio 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 9:53 PM.